Download Report

Legislative Watch
April 3, 2015
Ted Painter, National Legislative Director
Email: tedscottpainter@gmail.com
Phone: 508-335-3616
In this week’s Legislative Watch:
Congressman Seeks Input from AMRA Regarding Concurrent Receipt Legislation
“Doc Fix” Legislation Passes House; Stalls in Senate
VSO’s Testify before the House Military Personnel Subcommittee Regarding the MCRMC
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Releases 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
Mark-Up Schedule
Congressman Seeks Input from AMRA Regarding Concurrent Receipt Legislation
On March 30th AMRA joined representatives from the Military Officers Association of America (MOAA),
the Air Force Sergeants Association (AFSA), and legislative staff in the office of Congressman Sanford
Bishop (D-GA) to discuss the possible re-drafting of House Resolution 333: The Disabled Veterans Tax
Termination Act.
Battles to end the “concurrent receipt” issue have raged for years but always die a less than memorable
death due to the cost associated with providing disabled military retirees the benefits that they have
earned. Congressman Bishop’s staff called the meeting to explore options for ensuring that this
legislation does not meet with the same fate it has met with in previous sessions of Congress.
AMRA, MOAA , and the AFSA all agreed that some progress is better than no progress at all and that rewriting the legislation in such a way that would provide concurrent receipt for those who are most in
need will ensure that the legislation receives greater consideration without being immediately dismissed
due to the cost.
After discussing several courses of action, the three associations agreed that the legislation should be rewritten to provide concurrent receipt for Chapter 61 retirees in 2016. As currently written, concurrent
receipt would be provided to Chapter 61 retirees and to those with less than a 50% disability rating
(currently, those with ratings of 50% or higher do receive concurrent receipt of disability and retirement
pay).
Congressman Bishop’s staff must seek guidance from Legislative Counsel prior to making any final
determinations but one aspect that they will be asked to consider is the possibility of making Chapter
61’s the priority for 2016 and then including a provision that would seek to provide concurrent receipt
10% at a time over a combined period of 5 years.
Pending feedback from Legislative Counsel, AMRA, MOAA, and AFSA would like to see all who are
eligible receiving both disability and retirement benefits by the year 2020. It is the hope of all involved
that this gradual approach will be more palatable to Members of Congress and the American tax payer.
However, if it appears that this course of action will not pass, everyone agreed that focusing solely on
Chapter 61 retirees would become the goal of this legislation and that those who are left out will have
to be the focus of future legislative attempts to provide concurrent receipt.
“Doc Fix” Legislation Passes House; Stalls in Senate
On March 26th, the House passed House Resolution 2: The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization
Act of 2015. This legislation includes a previously introduced bill that AMRA has supported, H.R. 1470:
The SGR Repeal and Medicare Provider Payment Modernization Act of 2015.
In a 392-37 vote, the House passed HR 2, a bill that would permanently replace the formula for
reimbursing doctors who treat Medicare and TRICARE patients by requiring wealthier beneficiaries to
pay higher premiums. Individuals with incomes of between $133,501 and $160,000 would pay 65% of
premium costs, up from 50% now. For couples, the new percentage applies for incomes between
$267,001 and $320,000. For individuals making more than $160,000 annually and for couples with
incomes of $320,000 or above, new premiums would go from 65% now to 80%.
The Senate, however, failed to bring the measure to vote prior to Congress returning to their districts for
a two week recess.
What does the Senate’s failure to act mean? Failure to adequately address this lingering budgetary
issue could mean that, as of April 1st, physicians treating TRICARE and Medicare beneficiaries would no
longer receive full reimbursement for the services they provide and this, in turn, raises the possibility
that doctors could begin opting out of treating these beneficiaries, making access to care extremely
limited.
Fortunately, because both Medicare and TRICARE have lag times between when a claim is processed
and when payments to doctors are made, the Senate will have the opportunity to act upon their return
to Capitol Hill. If they can vote to pass legislation on this issue, Congress will be able to avoid
withholding 21% of physician reimbursements and prevent the likelihood of their choosing to no longer
treat TRICARE and Medicare patients.
VSO’s Testify Before the House Military Personnel Subcommittee on the MCRMC
Representatives from the Military Officers Association of America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Enlisted
Association of the National Guard of the United States, National Military Family Association, Iraq and
Afghanistan Veterans of America, and the American Legion testified before the House Military Personnel
Subcommittee to share their positions and concerns regarding the Military Compensation and
Retirement Modernization Commission on March 25th, 2015.
Chairman Joe Heck held this committee hearing in order to give lawmakers on this vital subcommittee a
chance to hear directly from prominent Veteran Service Organizations in an effort to gain a sense for
how veterans view the Commission’s recommendations. However, the feedback that these groups
provided to Members of Congress assured attendees of only one thing: If these groups accurately
reflect the veteran community, there is very little consensus among veterans or the organizations that
represent them.
Although the MCRMC was chartered to provide recommendations without regard to their impact on
DoD budgets, one cannot ignore the fact that many of the recommendations require diminishing current
benefits in order to fund new ones recommended by the Commission. For example, recommendation
#1, if implemented, reduces the current retirement stipend for future retirees from 50% to 40% so that
government matching of Thrift Savings Plans of up to 5% can occur.
When asked by Chairman Heck if they agreed with recommendation # 1, the VFW‘s representative—a
former Marine National Guardsman with six years of service—Brendan Gherke, stated that, “Congress
needs to move forward with recommendation # 1…because the current system is unfair…” He went on
to explain the VFW’s view, stating that those who serve for less than 20 years are being penalized by the
DoD because when they voluntarily choose to end their military service they do not receive any direct
compensation from the government.
Colonel (retired) Hayden of MOAA responded to the same question in much the same way that AMRA
has responded, saying that the current retirement system is dependable and that it is insulated from
market shifts and economic down turns whereas, the thrift savings plan is not.
When later asked by Congressman and retired CSM Walz, “is it a given that we have to take from the 20
year folks to give to non-retirees?” MOAA responded with a definitive, “no” while the VFW (whose
primary focus is not on retirees) stated, “…it’s not an either-or…in theory. But costs will skyrocket…if
you guys want to keep the 50% the VFW would support.”
Congressman Coffman, in an effort to find any shred of consensus, asked, “[In regard to retirement],
what do you agree with?” However, the answers did not provide the agreements that he was seeking.
EANGUS, stated that, overall, they support recommendation #1 but are concerned about financial
education access within the National Guard system. The IAVA stated that, overall, they support the
recommendation and the VFW reiterated its support while The American Legion and NMFA, who, like
the VFW, EANGUS, and IAVA, may not represent large numbers of retirees, remained relatively silent on
the issue, simply indicating that they would like more information. MOAA, whose membership is
comprised, in part, of retirees, stated that it agrees with the intent of the recommendation and that it
supports the “portability” of financial benefits that the recommendation provides to non-retirees.
However, MOAA continued to suggest that reducing the 50% stipend to pay for it is something that they
cannot support.
AMRA’s official position on recommendation # 1: AMRA does not support recommendation # 1 as
written. If other aspects of the Federal budget were to be examined and fraud, waste, and abuses were
to be reallocated to pay for the “blended” plan, leaving the current 50% stipend in place, AMRA would
support the entire recommendation.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Releases 2016 National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) Mark-Up Schedule
On Thursday, April 2nd, Chairman Thornberry released dates for the following full and subcommittee
hearings which will determine budget allocations for the Department of Defense, military construction,
defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths, and for other
purposes.
The following hearings will be streamed live and will be archived within 24 hours on the HASC youtube
channel:
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
2:30 PM - Subcommittee on Emerging Threats & Capabilities Markup (Room 2118)
4:00 PM - Subcommittee on Readiness Markup (Room 2212)
Thursday, April 23, 2015
8:30 AM - Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces Markup (Room 2118)
9:30 AM - Subcommittee on Military Personnel Markup (Room 2212)
10:30 AM - Subcommittee on Seapower & Projection Forces Markup (Room 2118)
12:00 PM - Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Markup (Room 2212)
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
10:00 AM—Full Committee Markup (Room 2118)
Questions or comments? Use contact information above.