A proposed policy included in President Obama's fiscal year 2010 Veterans' Affairs budget proposal would have VA hospitals bill vets' private health insurance for the treatment of service-related conditions. Veterans' groups have lashed out at the proposal, arguing that it would discourage companies from hiring veterans, as well as place a burden on vets that belongs with the VA.
“There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran’s
personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to
provide,” Disabled American Veterans, The American Legion, and nine other veterans groups wrote
in a letter to Obama late last month. The letter went on to accuse the VA of attempting to abdicate its responsibility to the servicemen and women who have "sacrificed a great deal for this country," and called the proposal, "unconscionable."
Joe Violante, National Legislative Director for DAV, told The Hill this week, "We hope that the administration will back away from this idea,”
Violante said. “If our government is not responsible for paying for the
wounds of war, what else are they going to do?” The health insurance policy, he added, “will have a chilling effect on hiring of severely disabled veterans.”
Experts say that the proposal to bill insurers for service-related injuries could produce as much as $500 million in additional revenue for VA hospitals yearly. The idea was first floated in the Clinton administration, and has returned to the table due to the current budget crisis.
What do you think? Should the VA bill private insurers for care related to injuries suffered while serving in the military? Is this proposal a way of shirking responsibilities to injured veterans, or a sign of good fiscal stewardship during the current recession?
See More Posts on Disabled Veterans and Military Issues
Photo Courtesy Army.mil
