Should veterans be entitled to completely free health care?

[Dark Angel]

I say yes. I say that any person who served their country in any of the services should be entitled to free health care, taxpayer funded, regardless of income level. Right now Bush is discriminating against higher income veterans by making them pay for health care that is not related to a service connected injury. I think that this is bull. These people aren't "RICH". They're making more than 30k a year. That's hardly rich. They deserve free health care, and they deserve it now.

I ask you all to please write or call your Congresspeople and ask them to increase the VA budget 300%. That is what it would take to get every veteran the health care that they need. Right now we spend about 50-60 billion on veterans health care. If we spent 150 billion, we could help so many more people. We could help all our brave veterans.

Here is a link so that you can do this if you wish. I have written my congressman many times about this issue, and called him, and e-mailed him

Here are the phone numbers if you want to call them about it:

http://clerkweb.house.gov/members/mcapdir.php

This site lists the phone numbers of every congressperson.

I am going to post this in the activism forum, too.

PLEASE PHONE YOUR CONGRESSPEOPLE ABOUT THIS

Thanks friends. Private message me with any questions if you want, or ask them in the thread.

I ALSO SUPPORT HEALTH CARE FOR EVERY AMERICAN, JUST TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. BUT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT VETERANS, SPECIFICALLY.

[DuctapeFatwa]

1. Everyone should be (nt)

[Dark Angel]

3. Thanks friend.

I agree. we need universal health care. But I am working on veterans health care right now. Will you write your congressperson for me?

[Wapsie B]

4. You got it.

Time to drag this country kicking and screaming out of the Dark Ages.

[bleedingheart]

50. I agree! Everyone should get free healthcare!

[Syrinx]

2. yes

And everyone else too.

[Djinn]

5. I think everyone should

we've managed it here in Australia without become a communist collective!

But I can't see that happening in the US for a long time - it has always amazed me though that you're politicians can use the military and slam their opponents for wanting "to gut the military" or of "not supporting the troops" yet let them become trapped in poverty and ill health when they get home...way to support the troops!

[Cleita]

6. They used to be after WWII.

They also had old soldier's homes for retirees who had no place else to go. When Reagan became president the first thing to go was all the old guys were thrown out. At that time there were county and state programs that could accept them, but things got worse and worse. I think what this country has done to vets since Reagan is an abomination. Even the ancient Romans honored their commitments to their veterans. Why can't we?

[Dark Angel]

7. 40% of homeless men are veterans

34% of the homeless are veterans.

I think it's embarrassing that we treat our soldiers this way.

[vetwife]

47. And 110,000 VN vets have died by suicide

It is starting with Iraq now. This administration and repug chickenhawk company has no shame. Dependents only get 70 percent paid insurance and they pay the deductible. A vet who does not have something considered service connection pays out of pocket and those they have 100 percent total and permanent ratings can't get treatment for more than 120.00 a month anywhere but a VA facility and even then if not service connected. They pay ! Not fair huh? Even a 100 percent disabled if he has insurance outside (like his wife's) They will bill the insurance. Here is a terrible fact.
If a military person makes a career out of his or her service. They retire and if they are injured..They can't get both. A compensation and a retirement. It is called concurrent receipt and they have to choose. But it they retired from AT & T or any private sector and have a disability that shows up. A vet can draw his earned retirement and his or her compensation for injury. You just can't get sick or injured and draw retirement and compensation from the military. Now thats a real recruiting tactic there huh?
The wait list is 7 to 9 months. Many die before being compensated and many die before getting seen by a facility. The wife or family cannot draw after th fact unless they were 100 percent total and permanent. They can get a small widows pension if the vet dies.

[Dark Angel]

53. That's embarrassing!

They should get 100% paid insurance. Check out my veterans thread in the activism forum on DU. You can do something about! Call your congressperson! Write them them! E-mail them!

[vetwife]

54. DarK Angel Good things there !

I have a 501 C-19 small vets org. and trust me under this administration there is nothing that can be done. I have worked with Max when he was in office and things were much better. I know John Lewis and he is great but this bunch is like Bush I only worse, they are getting nothing..and I know Tom Harkin. This is awful and getting worse by the day. These congress people know me too. I am on Guy's show a lot and he is carrying my Take it Back Cd and things are just gonna get worse. There is little congress can do because the caring ones are in the minority. The day we invaded Iraq 28 B was cut from VA's budget.

[burrowowl]

8. Yes and the rest of us too

us poor assholes are the only one paying taxes, why do't we get something other than Haliburton, KBR gets its all and HMO execs and private prisons, etc.

[Kanary]

45. Agree. *EVERYONE* should get free, quality medical care

It should be considered as part of the infrastructure of the nation.

The security of our nation depends on it.

Kanary

Another Delusional Diehard for Dennis!!

Kucinich 2004!

[SoCalDem]

9. In some cases, yes.. In others, no..

My father was career military, and when he joined, he was promised LIFETIME care for HIM and his wife..

Of course, over the years, those promises were broken...

But when someone joins the military, they are in a sense, signing a contract.. They abide by their duty and fulfill the contract, so it needs to be IN WRITING...what they were promised in return for putting themselves in harm's way..

BUT..

For young people who sign up for a 4-6 year stint, UNLESS they are injured in the service, their medical care should be treated no differently from the rest of us. Any military injury should be covered for life..(injury due to accident on duty,war injuries, and any illnesses that "could" be related to mandatory innoculations)..

When their service ends, their routine care ends too.. That's only fair.

For reservists & guard.. medical care same as above, but guard and reservists should not be allowed to continue forever. There should be an upper age limit. This "war" proves that we need more military, but it really makes no sense to send 45-50 yr old people to war..

Maybe the reserve & guard needs to be divided into "office" and field, with the office being the older ones..but I still think that 40 should be the upper limit for guard and reserve..

[Dark Angel]

10. I guess we disagree

I believe that any person who serves for more than 2 years should be eligible for free health care for the rest of their life. I think that we owe this to people who are willing to put their life on the line for our freedoms. I think that you owe it to them too.

[SoCalDem]

14. "willing to" is the phrase I have a problem with

For soldiers who serve a 4 yr stint in peacetime, and come out with free college, I see no reason why a healthy 24 yr old who will not serve again, and never was injured , or saw battle, should get free medical care for life..

It's different if they saw combat.. In fact soldiers who saw combat, SHOULD be entitled to lifetime mental health care, but if they were not injured, and get a college education out of their service, why should they even need to use military health care? You are aware that the military is actually usiing income caps to disqualify vets..??

I would rather see the older guys who were dropped off the rolls, get their coverage back, before 25 yr olds, with bronchitis being treated at at military hospital..

[Dark Angel]

17. Let's see

I would rather see the older guys who were dropped off the rolls, get their coverage back, before 25 yr olds, with bronchitis being treated at at military hospital..

Why not both? I support all veterans getting health care, DEFINITELY including those "older guys who were dropped off the rolls." I help some of those people, and sit with them, and they tell me about the wartime experiences, and the money is THERE, SocalDem! All we have to do is take the money out of DoD. We don't need a 400 billion+ Defense budget. That's insane. The money doesn't go to our troops either. We can take 100 billion out of DoD and shove it into the VA, and provide health care to every single veteran who served more than 2 years, and those who served less than 2 years but saw combat. We can take care of the "older guys who were dropped off the rolls", as well as the "25 year olds". Don't you agree? Unless you think there is something more important to do with the money, in which case I would disagree.

[Cleita]

13. Everybody needs health care and we need a system that

will deliver those health care dollars to those who need it not Wall Street profits.

[SoCalDem]

15. You are right.. We need one, but it will not be in our lifetimes

so, I am only addessing the system that we have now :)

[Dark Angel]

22. Yes, I think it will.

Well, I don't know how old you are, but I think that we will have universal health care in 20 years. By that I don't mean necessarily a single payer system, but rather that any American who needs health care is able to get health care.

[SoCalDem]

35. I am 54.....

and I am afraid that after 40+ years of paying extra so that we would NOT be a burden...we will get screwed big-time, all the while being accused of being "greedy"..

My generation is the first one really with "long-lived" parents (often very ill and needing specialized care)..my generation is also the first to have grown children who cannot afford to move out on their own at a young age, so we are the caretakers of ourselves, our parents, our grown kids, and THEIR kids..

Actually to alot of us, living to BE 65 or 67 or whatever the hell age they end up with, will be the real trick.:(.. Maybe we won't be as big of a burden and the youngsters think.. We may all welcome death as a way to avoid the whole hassle..:)

The well off amongst us, will be just fine.. but there are a hell of a lot of us, who are barely scraping by, and our government is too busy trying to keep from paying back all those stacks of iou papers.. you know then ones.. the ones the have been putting in since the 80's when they STOLE the social security money..

Universal care would be wonderful, but don't hold your breath..:)

[Cleita]

48. I'm eligible for Medicare next year, but now I don't know.

After this first big hole shot into the system with the prescription drug non-benefit, we seniors and future seniors need to force our elected representatives to do something about this.

[peacebuzzard]

11. Hell yes. And their dependents.

We all deserve it but they do and their families do especially. No doubt.

[Dark Angel]

12. I agree

It will take a tripling of the va budget. but we can do that. All we have to do is cut the defense budget, and put it into VA.

[murielm99]

16. My first husband died in 1975.

He had served in WWII and Korea. He was Navy.

When he became ill with a non-service related illness, he got free care at Hines VA. He was in a private hospital for awhile, but did all his chemo at the VA hospital.

One of the the things I noticed was that lots of the doctors and nurses there were people who were vets who worked in private practices, but they volunteered a few days a week at the VA hospital. My husband's oncologist did not have to do this. He was just a good guy.

There is no reason we cannot continue this service to our veterans. So many people have limited insurance, or none at all. Even though we had insurance, the cost of his care could have bankrupted us without the VA.

[Dark Angel]

19. I'm sorry for your loss

Your husband is an inspiration to all of us. He must have been a great guy.

[camero]

18. Health Care should be Universal

for everyone. Not the two-tiered system we have now. One for the rich and another for everyone else.

[Dark Angel]

20. I assume you refer to the

fact that our health care system is rationed by price, instead of waiting lines? For example, the equilibrium price of health care is a floating price, but it is normally above what the government is willing to pay for it. That's why you have wait times. We need to double or triple the earned income tax credit to the poor, and increase aid to the states so that they can put more people on their state programs.

[camero]

21. Oh please

You sound almost like the HMO's. The waiting times are just as long here as they are in Canada. And they have a single-payer system.

[Dark Angel]

23. You know what

If you are just going to be rude then forget it. I'm tired of you being rude to me. I have no problem with talking to other people on here, but you are just incredibly rude and sarcastic. Health care waiting lines ARE longer in Canada, for certain procedures. That's why some people go to Seattle hospitals for health care, and that Canadian province had to contract with a Seattle hospital for some services because their wait lines were so long.

When something is free, there are always going to be wait lines. That's why it's better to keep a private system and use subsidies to lower income people.

[camero]

25. lol

See the little zzzzzs at the top. Click on it. I'm not beign rude pointing out that you are making a deceptive argument. And I've only seen right wing links from your posts. What does that tell me?

[Dark Angel]

26. I posted ONE right wing link,

and I pointed out that it was right wing right there in the post.

Thanks for the zzz tip.

[Dark Angel]

27. By the way,

got any links to prove your assertions that the waiting lines are as long here as they are in Canada?

I never have to wait for an appointment or procedures. I call, set up an appointment, and go. I have co-pays, deductible, etc, but it's hardly comparable to Canada's system.

Also. 85% of Americans are already covered with health insurance. 15% aren't. Let's take care of the 15% that aren't. But why develop a whole new system and put everyone in that? I've heard the paperwork arguments and how our system is wasteful, but we still have a very high life expectancy. Japan is only about 3 or 4 years more than us, and the other countries with single payer/national health care systems are about the same as us.

[camero]

29. Here it is.

http://www.amsa.org/hp/myths.cfm


MYTH: There would be waiting lists for surgeries and high-tech procedures, which is why Canadians come to the United States to get health services.
FACT: The United States has waiting lists for specialty care, too. Canadians rarely come to the United States for health care. Less than 1 percent of Canada's health budget goes to paying for care Canadians get in the United States. Canada's waiting-list problem stems largely from underfunding, which is being corrected now. Waiting times would likely be no longer in the United States than they are now, because we would still spend much more than other countries do on health care and still have many more specialists and capacity.

[Dark Angel]

31. Interesting

I'm honestly re-considering my position on single payer. I think that it might actually be better than the blue cross coverage that I have now. And medical students would know a lot about the health care system. I am for whatever works, without wait times. I would be disappointed if this sytem resulted in wait times.

Don't think that I like you now, or anything. Lol

[Dark Angel]

34. This part is weird, however.

MYTH: Medicine would be rationed.
FACT: Managed care already rations medicine. A single-payer universal health plan would ration services based on medical necessity. Managed care rations services based on profit. Under single-payer universal health care, no one would be denied care due to pre-existing conditions.

So they ADMIT that health care would be rationed based on necessity. People needing non-essential surgeries and procedures would have to wait longer for care, compared to now, where if you have the money and good health insurance, you can get that surgery right away!

[SoCalDem]

39. Right.. I had Kaiser and had to wait FIVE WEEKS

to see an opthalmologist .. The eye condition I had was actually comparable to an " ocular stroke".. I lost my vision in that eye.

Having coverage does not guarantee "good" coverage:(

[camero]

40. I had a friend who had to wait 6 months

for surgery to put a rod in his back because of a spinal injury.

And you know about waiting times for even Primary doctor's apppointments can be weeks. :hi:

Edit: The surgeon was in Philly.

[camero]

33. Another

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_myths_singlepayer_facts.php



Waits for services would be extremely long.
Again, in countries with NHI, urgent care is always provided immediately. Other countries do experience some waits for elective procedures (like cataract removal), but maintaining the US’s same level of health expenditures (twice as much as the next-highest country), waits would be much shorter or even non-existent.

[camero]

36. and another

http://cthealth.server101.com/the_case_for_universal_health_care_in_the_united_states.htm

Fact Five: There would be no lines under a universal health care system in the United States because we have about a 30% oversupply of medical equipment and surgeons, whereas demand would increase about 15%

[Dark Angel]

37. are you going to respond to my two subposts above?

I'm going to bed. I'll look at these tomorrow afternoon, probably.

[camero]

38. Yaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnn

:boring:

Conclusion: The US denies access to health care based on the ability to pay. Under a universal health care system all would access care. There would be no lines as in other industrialized countries due to the oversupply in our providers and infrastructure, and the willingness/ability of the United States to spend more on health care than other industrialized nations.

[kodi]

24. free health care program 4 vets is the precursor for universal health care

one step at a time is about the only way it can realistically proceed considering the forces that oppose it.

[countmyvote4real]

28. Yes and of course they deserve it.

Unfortunately, that puts some of us in a freelancer position who don't have corporate supported health care in a bind.

It's time for universal single payer heath care coverage. Nobody should be special in that regard. However, veterans are special and should be rewarded accordingly and as promised.

The current crop need to seek more incentives for their service to the mad man running the asylum. Obviously, * doesn't see it that way. That's why the draft is coming back. * doesn't give a shit about our military and veterans. In his mind they were and are cannon fodder. That's something he chose not to be.

[Dark Angel]

30. I can't believe Bush would do a draft

Drafts are extremely unpopular with kids, and families with kids. Then again, he would have nothing to lose for doing it if he got another term. :scared:

[FireHeart]

32. Yes indeed.

Both vets and military retirees should have full and complete medical coverage/care available without charge. When you have offered to give up your life for your country, regardless of circumstance, then we, as a nation, owe these people more than we've ever offered them.

Medical care should be just one benefit given to all vets and retirees.

[JDPriestly]

41. Life-long medical care for veterans

I agree that veterans should be given life-long free, or at least very low-cost, medical care. That policy would improve the health of a large part of the population and encourage more people to apply to join the military. Even those that spend only two years in the military make a tremendous contribution to our country at great personal cost. They lose two to four years of their youth. Other young people are using those years to get a head start on finishing their education or starting a career. People in the military earn lower wages than they would in other jobs with comparable responsibility.

We lived in several European countries for a number of years and raised our children there. I loved the single-payer systems. My prenatal care and my children's medical care was wonderful. I could choose any doctor I wanted. Here, you have to choose a doctor that is on your plan. I never had to wait too long for medical care. If you have ever been enrolled in an HMO, you probably know that your doctor may have incentives to refuse to refer you to a specialist. I have had great difficulty getting a referral to a specialist.

My only criticism of European medicine is that the doctors are not as well-trained as American doctors. That has to do with the university system, not with the single-payer system.

[Dark Angel]

42. How is the education system typically funded there?

Becuase we have some good public universities here, like UCLA and UC Berkeley, and they are publically funded. UCLA has a great medical school, for example. So I guess I'm asking, what's the difference?

Is it the fact that admission into medical school is easier there, so you end up with less qualified doctors?

[cetasika]

43. yes

everyone should

[doc03]

44. I think in a country this rich everyone should have health care, also

when I went in the military in 1968 we were promised VA benefits such as medical care, home loans and the GI Bill for education. My union contract also promised health care retirement benefits and they broke their promise too.

[DemLikr]

46. Only if we all are, as we should be. N/T

[SoundWave]

49. I can't find it in the Constitution or Bill of Rights....but

http://www.archives.gov/national_archives_experience/constitution.html">Constitution
http://www.archives.gov/national_archives_experience/bill_of_rights.html">Bill of Rights

I've read both documents and can't find anything about free health care.
Maybe that should change. As someone said earlier, with a country this rich, there's no reason not to. But instead of providing our own citizens, we instead send billions to other countries. Mostly to buy their support.

[Dark Angel]

51. You're gone

bye-bye.

[Kimber Scott]

52. Yes.

We offer our bodies on the government's altar, they should take care of them forever. Period.

[Skittles]

55. are you referring to retired veterans or all veterans

???