About the Chairman | About the Committee | Committee News | Committee Hearings | Committee Documents | Committee Legislation | VA Benefits | VA Health Care | Veterans' Links | Democrat's Home Page | Contact the Committee

MARCH 7, 2000 

Biography of Frederick P. Athans, SMSgt, USAF (Ret)

National President

The Retired Enlisted Association

National President Frederick P. Athans enlisted in the U.S. Air Force on June 1, 1951 immediately after graduating from Milford High School in Stratford, Connecticut. After completion of basic military training and aircraft maintenance school, President Athans was assigned to Korea. Following a one year tour during the Korean conflict, he returned to the United States, being assigned to Otis Air Force Base to work in the Air Defense Command (ADC). Again being assigned overseas, President Athans was assigned to Sidi Slmaine, Morrocco and RAF Bentwaters, England. He returned to the United States in 1961 and took part in the military build-up surrounding the Cuban Missile Crisis. In 1966, President Athans was assigned to Vietnam. After returning in 1967, he was assigned to the Squadron Inspection and Evaluation Teams of the 1^st Air Force Headquarters at Stewart AFB, New York. President Athans then left ADC and was transferred to the Department of State’s Military Assistance and Advisory Group (MAAG), in aircraft procurement and maintenance, in Taipei, Taiwan. President Athans again returned to Vietnam in 1972 as an advisor to Nationalist Chinese Air Force units. President Athans returned to the United States and retired from the United States Air Force in 1974 at the rank of Senior Master Sergeant.

In 1978, President Athans became a Civil Service employee, first specializing in transit aircraft maintenance, then transferring to the Commissary Service. President Athans retired from Civil Service in 1997.

He has served numerous positions within The Retired Enlisted Association including Chapter President of Chapter 29 of Rapid City, South Dakota, National Director, National First Vice President and was elected National President in September, 1998.

President Athans’ military and professional training include graduating from the NCO Academy, the Senior NCO Academy, Air Force Management School, Military Assistance and Advisory Special Training as well as attending the University of Maryland studying Business Management and Cornell University for Contract Management.

President Athans’ 12 military awards include the Meritorious Service Medal, Bronze Star with "V" device, Vietnam Service medal as well as being awarded Outstanding Assistance Medal for Chinese Air Force, Taiwan.

President Athans and his wife, Barbara, reside in Rapid City, South Dakota.

The Retired Enlisted Association does not currently receive, has not received during the current fiscal year or either of the two previous years any federal money for grants or contracts. All of the Association’s activities and services are accomplished completely free of any federal funding. 

Chairman Specter, Chairman Stump, Ranking Member Rockefeller, Ranking Member Evans, distinguished members of the House and Senate, on behalf of the 110,000 members and auxiliary of The Retired Enlisted Association (TREA) and the over 1 million enlisted retirees of the United States Armed Forces, I would like to express our appreciation for having the opportunity to come before you today and provide our view as to what benefit structure we believe will best benefit current and future enlisted retirees.

Let me begin by first thanking the members of this committee, and the entire Congress, for their action in passing the Veterans Millennium Health Care Act last year. This comprehensive legislation, the most significant improvements to veterans benefits in years, will, no doubt, go a long way to providing our nation’s veterans with access to quality health care. The Millennium Act takes an important step in the development of a continuum of care by providing emergency care and long term care for veterans. Further, it provides a special enrollment category for TRICARE eligible military retirees. We are certainly pleased with this development. However, many military retirees are not eligible for TRICARE. In order for those retirees to be able to continue to receive care at the Department of Veterans Affairs, additional legislation needs to be passed.

MEDICARE SUBVENTION

The time has come to allow the Department of Veterans Affairs to bill Medicare when the VA treats Medicare patients. Commonly referred to as Medicare Subvention, this particular program can accomplish two goals: one, the VA would benefit by billing Medicare for care it may have to provide to veterans regardless of whether or not the VA would be compensated. Two, it greatly improves veterans’ access to health care. Presently, many older veterans are severely limited in their health care options. In particular, military retirees over the age of 65 are forced out of the TRICARE system. These retirees were the ones who were promised free life-time health care if they served twenty or more years in the military. We were not told that legislation passed in 1956 and 1966 effectively eliminated that benefit. In fact, recruits up until 1993 were being told of the promise of free medical care in return for a military career. Allowing those veterans to receive their health care at the VA will greatly expand the number of facilities a military retiree could turn to for care, thereby greatly improving the health care benefit offered to those who have served this nation. TREA realizes that the Medicare Subvention program also falls under the jurisdiction of the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committee, however, we would certainly appreciate the support of all the members of the Veterans Affairs Committees in this process. This issue has gone on long enough. In the past, we have had support in the House, but not in the Senate, and vice versa. While political posturing continues, veterans suffer without access to quality health care. We have been informed that the Senate is ready to act on legislation, therefore, to those members of the House of Representatives, I ask you today to urge your colleagues on the Health Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee to finally address this issue.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of Congress who worked together to increase the VA’s budget $1.7 billion over initial projections last year. This figure will certainly help assist the VA provide the kind of health care that our nation’s veterans deserve. This increase, along with the President’s request for Fiscal Year 2001, will allow the veterans community to focus on the many important issues outside the health care environment today.

HEALTH CARE FACILITIES

There may be additional funding for veterans’ health care already within the VA’s annual appropriation. Presently, the VA is working to redefine its facilities in the wake of technological enhancements in the health care arena. The continually increasing number of Community Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOC) has greatly increased veterans access to health care. These new, or renovated, facilities are helping veterans by "going to the veterans" as opposed to veterans having to travel sometimes hundreds of miles to the nearest VA Medical Center. The General Accounting Office reported in December 1995 that 11% of veterans live within 5 miles of a VA hospital and 17% of veterans live within 5 miles of an outpatient clinic. Further studies show that for every 1,000 veterans who live within 5 miles of a hospital, 34 use that facility for acute or surgical care, while for every 1,000 veterans within 5 miles of an outpatient clinic, 131 use that facility (VA Health Care, How Distance From VA Facilities Affects Veterans’ Use of VA Services). We have a wonderful opportunity to use modern science to expand the number of veterans who can easily, and therefore be more likely, to receive care from the VA. The implementation of these clinics is a positive development in achieving the VA’s mission. I would urge this committee to authorize full funding for the VA’s request for outpatient clinics this year and in future years. While the CBOC program is an example of a successful facilities development program being carried out by the Department of Veterans Affairs, there are other concerns relating to the facilities run by the VA. The GAO reports that the VA is spending $1 million a day on unneeded facilities (General Accounting Office, VA Health Care, Challenges Facing VA in Developing an Asset Realignment Process). This, simply, means less money can be directed to veterans health care. The time has come to analyze the infrastructure that was created in the post-World War II era as well as the demographics as to where our veterans are living today. Today, the VA directs funding to specific regions based on the number of patients being treated in that region. However, this does not address the number of unused hospital beds or empty buildings currently being maintained by the VA. This step must be taken so some of the $365 million being spent annually can be directed towards health care, not facilities maintenance. Further, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reports that by closing on VA hospital in an area with several facilities, the VA can redirect $200 million over ten years from facilities to health care while still providing veterans in that region with quality health care (GAO, VA Health Care, Closing a Chicago Hospital Would Save Millions and Enhance Access to Services). 

ELIGIBILITY REFORM

2000 is the second year in a row in which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs has announced that all veterans who desire can be enrolled in the VA for health care. This is significant because it means that a large number of non-service connected veterans, who’s income is above the means test, are now guaranteed health care through the VA. This has dramatically increased the number of potential patients at VA facilities. The unfortunate consequence of this decision is that service-connected disabled veterans are having difficult in receiving health care due to lack of space. While the category system may exist in name, it does not in practice. We have been greatly disturbed by calls we have received from disabled veterans, rated above 50%, placing them in Category 1, being told that there were no primary care teams to enroll them into because Category 7 veterans had flooded the system. Further, we have heard of a veteran rated 100% disabled having to wait three months for a particular medical appointment.

While TREA appreciates the efforts of Congress for enacting eligibility reform, and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for finding the necessary funding to allow Category 7 veterans to enroll, we are concerned that this increase in customers has shifted the focus away from disabled veterans seeking care for their service connected disabilities.

CHAMPVA

The survivors of veterans who died from a service connected disability often fight the same struggle as military retirees and their survivors. Once they reach they age of 65 their VA health care benefit ceases and they are forced onto Medicare. As an organization representing military retirees, we are often engaged in the struggle to provide Medicare-eligible military retirees with greater access to health care. We believe that the time has come to extend that fight to include CHAMPVA beneficiaries who lost their benefit as well.

We have been extremely pleased with recent legislation introduced in both the Senate and House of Representatives which provides military retirees with the option to enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan (FEHBP). We believe this is a justifiable benefit based on the promise of life-time health care made to military retirees. Now, we would like to work with Congress to ensure that those survivors formerly covered by CHAMPVA are provided with additional health care options when they reach age 65. 

EDUCATION BENEFITS

For more then 50 years, veterans of the Armed Forces of the United States have been rewarded for their honorable service with education opportunities. From World War II through today, an educational benefit has existed which was designed to make me good soldiers even better citizens. Unfortunately, the benefit provided to members of the services today does not adequately meet their educational needs. Based on the recommendations of the Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance, along with the obvious data reflecting the increase in college tuition and fees, the time has come to enhance the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).

Today, the MGIB is paying just over half of the average tuition and fees of a public, four year college education for a non-resident student. Mr. Chairman, we have two choices, either increase the benefit, or tell new recruits that the MGIB pays for half of their education. I know that you, Chairman Stump and your colleague Mr. Evans have introduced legislation to increase the benefit. As has Sen. Cleland. We thank you for your leadership. We must remain vigilant in our efforts and realize the education system in this country has changed greatly over the years. College tuition increases have nearly always doubled inflation over the past few years. That has made the pursuing of a college degree much more difficult for separating servicemembers as the value of the MGIB has steadily decreased. Further, education itself has changed. No longer is a four year degree the only form of higher education. Often, separating servicemembers may take a course over six months which costs thousands of dollars. This issue needs to be addressed within the context of any GI Bill improvement for the 21^st Century.

TREA is proud to have joined with an unprecedented organization of representatives from higher education and the veterans community to push for a minimum standard of what the educational benefit must be. That minimum, to be determined annually, will be based on the average cost of a four year degree at a public college for a non-resident student. At a minimum, this is what we owe our veterans for this will provide them with the education they were promised.

Another education concern of TREA deals with those who earned their educational benefit prior to the enactment of the MGIB, following the Vietnam era. The Post-Vietnam Era Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) permitted individuals who first became members of the armed forces during the VEAP era (1977-1985) to contribute up to $2,700 to a personal education account matched 2 for 1 by the Department of Defense. Aside from Service "kickers," the maximum education benefit from VEAP is $8,100, of which one-third ($2,700) is paid by the member. Compared to the current MGIB basic rate of $536 per month, VEAP users would exhaust the government-funded portion of the maximum benefit in only 10 months or about one academic year.

But the greater problem is that for years Service counselors advised VEAP participants to cash out of their VEAP accounts and invest the money for their education in the belief that they could make a VEAP contribution before separating. When Congress enacted VEAP conversion legislation in 1996, a legal ruling determined that only those with a balance in their VEAP accounts were eligible for conversion to the MGIB. The Dole Commission report states that there are approximately 103,000 VEAP-era participants eligible for benefits. The Commission recommended that they be allowed to become eligible for the MGIB by agreeing to pay the $1,200 entry premium. The cost of this initiative is estimated to be about $200-300 million, but this figure may not take into account the substantial offset savings to the Department of Veterans Affairs by lowering and terminating at an earlier date the overhead costs for administering VEAP.

As a matter of fairness and morale for the active duty career force and to enhance their readjustment opportunities, TREA strongly supports "VEAP Conversion" as recommended by the Commission and, therefore, urges passage of the conversion provision in H.R. 1071.

CLAIMS PROCESSING

Of all the difficulties facing veterans in their dealings with the Department of Veterans Affairs, perhaps none is more demoralizing then the current claims process. Veterans with service connected disabilities should not be discouraged from applying for their earned entitlement to disability compensation because they know that the system will be working against them. TREA is pleased that the Department of Veterans Affairs is in the process of hiring more claims adjudicators, adding nearly 1,000 over the past two years. However, we remain skeptical that these additions will have enough of an impact to truly correct this problem. Perhaps the most significant difficulty facing the Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA) is the fact that in Fiscal Year 1998 VBA tested its new accuracy review system. This system found an accuracy rate of only 64% for VA Regional Offices’ initial decisions (General Accounting Office, Veterans’ Benefit Claims, Further Improvements Needed in Claims-Processing Accuracy). This despite the fact that until recently, VBA claimed Regional Offices had a 95% accuracy rate.

Further, the length of time required to get a response from the VA is unacceptable. The most recent figures on claims processing show that the existing backlog makes the stated goal of 74 days for a rating-related action unlikely. Further, the increasing complexity, both medically and legally, will continue to have a significant impact on timeliness. The Board of Veterans Appeals currently renders a decision within 120 days of receiving an appeal. However, the total elapsed processing time for an appeal in the first quarter of FY 99 was 968 days, and this is an improvement from FY 98! A time-frame of nearly two and one-half years is not satisfactory. TREA is pleased the VA is working to correct this delay but the fact remains that it still exists. Outside the Department of Veterans Affairs Headquarters is a quote from President Lincoln which reads, "To care for him who shall have borne the battle and his widow and his orphan." In reality, many who have borne the battle do not receive what they earned for fighting in that battle. The process of filing a claim needs to be reviewed to ensure that veterans who deserve compensation receive it in a timely and efficient manner.

DISABILITY COMPENSATION

A cause of great concern for veterans receiving disability compensation is the fact that Congress must act annually to approve a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) to those receiving disability compensation as well as survivors receiving dependency indemnification compensation (DIC). Why does Congress address this issue annually? Can this COLA not be an automatic adjustment, such as the COLA given to federal retirees, military retirees, military retiree survivors and Social Security recipients. It would appear that we are inviting a mishap by not ensuring that this adjustment happens in the same format as other federal pensions.

Another issue of great concern to military retired veterans is the fact that they must offset their retirement pay dollar for dollar to the amount of VA disability they receive. This issue, commonly called Concurrent Receipt, places military retirees in a class of their own when it comes to receiving VA disability. Unfortunately, this is a class that is punished for twenty or more years of military service, not rewarded for it. No other veteran, whether a federal employee or private sector employee, has their retirement offset if they receive VA disability. According to the Department of Defense, there are presently over 400,000 retired enlisted members of the uniformed services who are forced to offset their retirement. Often, these disabled veterans are unable to work due to conditions which are connected to the military service. The reward that these veterans receive is a deduction in their retirement. It is imperative that something be done to assist these veterans live better lives. The support of the members of this committee would be greatly appreciated in our efforts to gain these retirees some sort of relief.

It is also important to remember that the payment received from the Department of Veterans Affairs is not retired pay, but compensation for a disability sustained in service to our country. Unfortunately, there are those who would like to strip this service-connected compensation from retirees. TREA is concerned with the frequent garnishment of VA disability compensation in cases of divorce. Marriages ending in divorce have become a common occurrence in our society, including the military community. In order to protect the spouses of members of the Armed Forces, Congress, in 1982, passed the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act, Public Law 97-252; 10 USC 1408. Unfortunately, this legislation which Congress assumed would help many has only damaged the lives of retirees, particularly those receiving disability. The USFSPA gives judges issuing the divorce decree the right to award up to 50% of a retirees pay to a former spouse as part of the settlement. However, judges have failed to recognize the fact that VA disability compensation is not retirement pay. Disability compensation should not be garnished to pay court-ordered obligations. Now, military retirees who are disabled, the more severely disabled the worse situation, are forced to surrender up to all of their already reduced retirement pay and a portion of their disability pension. This in spite of the fact that the USFSPA is supposed to protect disability pay from being garnished and that the United States Supreme Court reinforced this fact in its ruling in Mansel vs. Mansel in May, 1989.

Presently, the military retiree community is waiting the release of a Congressionally mandated report on this issue from the Department of Defense. The report, which was due 1 October 1999, has yet to be submitted. I would ask the members of this Committee to stress to the Department of Defense the importance of this issue to military retirees and urge the completion of this report as soon as possible.

We recognize the fact that the issue of the Former Spouse Protection Act falls under the jurisdiction of your colleagues on the Armed Services Committee. However, it is imperative of this Committee to pass legislation which will strengthen the protections of VA disability compensation because it is obvious that they are being ignored today.

GULF WAR ILLNESS

Health care and disability compensation for veterans of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm are another area of concern for TREA. The concept of service connected disability is relatively simple. If you leave the military with an illness you did not have when you entered, you are no longer a "whole person" as defined by the VA and are, therefore, entitled to a disability rating and proportionate compensation. Many veterans of the Persian Gulf returned with symptoms of no particular illnesses or injury. In response, Congress passed legislation allowing the VA to compensate these veterans with undiagnosed illnesses. Currently, the VA has extended the eligibility period to

December 31, 2001 for compensation for undiagnosed illnesses in Gulf War veterans. We are certainly pleased that the VA has done this. We are also pleased that the GAO reported in 1998 that the VA has taken a number of steps to improve its processing of Persian Gulf claims (General Accounting Office, Veterans’ Benefits, Improvements Made to Persian Gulf Claims Processing). However, the work is not finished. Let us not repeat the mistakes that were made over the issue of Agent Orange twenty years ago, where many died while studies were trying to determine the cause of their illness. We may never know what happened to our men and women who served in the Gulf. But we do know that they are sick and in need of our help. I would like to thank the many members of Congress, from both sides of the aisle, who have introduced legislation calling for increased research, expansion of the list of illnesses which are service connected and other issues relating to Persian Gulf illness. I sincerely hope these veterans will not be forgotten as time goes by and memories of our nation’s efforts in 1990 - 1991 become part of history.

VA HOME LOAN

Last year, when I had the pleasure to testify before this Committee, I referred often to the Dole Commission’s findings. Among the many areas of agreement TREA had with the Commission, there were areas of disagreement. One particular area of concern for those of us who spent twenty or more years in the military was the recommendation concerning the limiting of the VA Home Loan guarantee to one use. I, again, want to reiterate TREA’s support for the Home Loan program. I am pleased that Congress has not acted upon this recommendation as individuals who make the military a career may choose, at some point in time, to buy a home that meets their needs. Perhaps this may come with the arrival of a child or at a location where base housing may not be available. These servicemembers should not be forced into having to determine whether or not to buy a home while still on active duty or wait until retirement. The VA Home Loan program has been a successful program for decades and it would be unfair to career servicemembers to limit the program to one use thereby forcing them into difficult decisions that their predecessors did not have to make. Instead of being a transition benefit, this could cause a difficulty veterans should not have to deal with when separating from the Armed Forces.

VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

As veterans, we are pleased and grateful that our nation has created a system of programs to help us readjust to civilian life and recover from injuries sustained while in service to this nation. We urge that these programs be guaranteed the necessary funding to make them effective. Veterans often need assistance finding jobs or earning disability compensation. However, if the system is not serving those it was designed to help, then the system is broken. The GAO reports that only 8% of veterans participating in the vocational rehabilitation program are rehabilitated. This in comparison to 37% rehabilitated by the Department of Education in their state vocational rehabilitation program. Further 41% dropped out of the VA’s rehabilitation program while 32% dropped out of the Department of Education’s (General Accounting Office, Vocational Rehabilitation, VA Continues to Place Few Disabled Veterans in Jobs). Why does this discrepancy exist? If veterans are dropping out, or not displaying confidence in programs, then the programs are broken. If veterans with disabilities are being told their is "no space" for them at the hospital, the system is broken.

ARLINGTON ELIGIBILITY

It is our hope that the Senate will address another important issue which the House addressed during the last session. Chairman Stump’s Arlington Burial Eligibility Act is a piece of legislation important to all veterans, not only military retirees. I would like to thank the members of the House of Representatives for their overwhelming support of this legislation. The controversies of 1998 concerning our nation’s most hallowed resting place are sad, and must never be allowed to happen again. The politicization of Arlington National Cemetery must never happen again. House Resolution 70 will guarantee that Arlington will remain what it was intended to be, a final resting place for military heroes.

NEW NATIONAL CEMETERIES

I would also like to urge Congressional support for the continued expansion of the VA Cemetery system. Some may look upon the creation of National Cemeteries as an unnecessary expense. However, as veterans, we share a common bond with others who served with us in unfriendly places far away from home. As the reality of our own mortality, and that of the generation of Americans who fought and won World War II becomes more prevalent, the need for expansion of cemeteries becomes more pressing. The General Accounting Office (GAO) reports that the years 2005 - 2010 will see the peak in veterans interments in national cemeteries. The total burials will be 40% higher than in 1995, this despite the fact that half of all national cemeteries will not be able to accommodate casket interments at new grave sites (General Accounting Office Report, National Cemetery System, Opportunities to Expand Cemeteries’ Capacities). Now is the time to act to ensure that those veterans who wish to rest alongside their comrades in arms should not have to worry about whether or not there will be space in the cemetery for them. The Department of Veterans Affairs has $110 million for national cemeteries. These additional funds will help open 5 cemeteries in 2001 and begin the master planning in 4 other sites. We hope that this request is fully funded.

In conjunction with the issues of national cemeteries, I would like to take a moment to refer to the military burial honors program developed last year. Working along side one another, the Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, the military services and the Veterans Service Organizations (VSOs), tried to develop a burial honors program which would honor all of our nation’s veterans who’s family requested a military presence at their funeral. Following along with the will of Congress, expressed through legislation introduced in the Senate, this Department of Defense lead working group met several times to try to resolve this issue. The final result, however, was disappointing in that, once again, an unfunded mandate has been placed upon members of the uniformed services. At a time when our military is overworked, undermanned, and under-funded we have just given them an additional duty without providing the necessary resources. I would urge the members of this committee, particularly those who serve on the Armed Services Committee, to address this situation by providing the necessary funding to carry out this new mission.

KEEPING TRACK OF OUR NATION’S VETERANS

One lesson that has been learned through our experiences with Gulf War Illness, is the ability to track down veterans after they separate from the military. As we enter a new century this nation still does not have an accurate database of all its veterans. The VA does not necessarily have a copy of the discharge papers (DD-214) for veterans who separated before 1974. That means there are, potentially, millions of veterans from World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam who are not recorded in the VA’s database. Further, once a veteran moves after they separate, their address is no longer accurate. The 21^st Century is the present. It is time we use the technology we have developed in order to track our veterans throughout their lives. By doing so, the VA will better understand their needs and have the ability to inform veterans of their entitlements in a timely and efficient manner.

This issue needs to be addressed by your colleagues on the Commerce/State/Justice Appropriation Subcommittee. However, the members of this Committee can, no doubt, impress upon the members of the appropriations subcommittee how important it is that we have the ability to get in contact with our veterans when necessary.

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chairman, I recognize the fact that I addressed several issues which fall outside of the jurisdiction of the Veterans Affairs Committees and are addressed by the Armed Services Committees. I felt it was necessary to do this as the Armed Services Committees do not have as many public witnesses as the VA Committee does and 11 members of this joint Committee serve on either the Senate or House Armed Services Committee. Those members must bring our message back to their respective Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Chairman, in the beginning of my remarks, I referred to the historic Millennium Act passed last year. In it, TRICARE-eligible retirees will have a greater opportunity to gain care at the VA. As I stated, however, many retirees are not eligible for TRICARE. Those retirees were forced, without choice, onto Medicare simply because of their age. It concern me greatly that these retirees continue to be treated so unfairly. Are they not veterans the same as anyone else? We often use the simple phrase, "a veteran is a veteran." Yet, I look at who the VA is treating today, while I see my fellow retirees struggle with no options for health care. Mr. Chairman, are you aware that 70% of the veterans served at the VA are indigent? So poor that the qualify for Medicaid? Are you aware sir, that the VA is the nation’s largest provider of care to HIV-infected individuals? (Independent Budget, Fiscal Year 2001)

Why, Mr. Chairman, does the VA duplicate the services of Medicaid? In this era of limited resources, 70% of the VA’s patients could be treated by other government programs. But, for reasons unbeknownst to me, these veterans who served their nation for two or four years, receive quality care at the VA while military retirees, those who dedicated their careers, and their families well-being to their nation, are told to fend for themselves once they turn 65, or if the base in their region closes. Mr. Chairman, in a public hearing, one member of Congress stated military retirees in who wanted health care, "move near a base." Move from family and friends because their government failed them. A government which forced them into Medicare or, even worse, closed their facility, but does not force other veterans into other government programs. Mr. Chairman, it upsets me greatly to know that my fellow military retirees are paying thousands annually for what was supposed to be a free benefit and that many more have no options for health care. If any veterans have an entitlement to free health care it is the military retiree and service connected veteran.

Chairman Specter, Chairman Stump, Ranking Member Rockefeller, Ranking Member Evans, honorable Committee members, thank you for the opportunity to come before you today. It is truly an honor and a privilege. Today I presented an outline of areas where TREA believes progress can be made in helping our nation’s veterans. We recognize the constraints under which you must determine which program is funded and which is not. However, we ask you to remember the sacrifice that many of you, as veterans, made for your country and to all that is possible to ensure that our veterans have the finest benefits afforded to them.

Again, thank you for your time. I would be pleased to answer any questions at this time.

Back to Witness List