Thursday, September 28, 2006

Is this another example of "support the troops" ?

 I found this in the Military Officers Association of America home page. This will have an adverse affect on military dependent spouses and children. While our troops are fighting the wars that are going on this is how they are being "supported".  When a soldier', sailor's, marine's or airman's family member needs medical care they will not get the help they need.

 

 How can our troops do their job effectively if their family members are not being provided the medical care the troops pay for?  (in many more ways than one)

 

 If you find this as offensive as I do, write your congressional representative and demand this not be allowed to happen to our service members or their spouses and children. 

 

 

     Stop the Coming Medicare/TRICARE Cut  

MOAA's Director of government relations, Colonel Steve Strobridge (USAF-Ret), joined four American Medical Association leaders in speaking at a Washington press conference on Sept. 13 to urge Congress to act now to reverse the 5.1% cut in Medicare and TRICARE payments to doctors scheduled to take effect in January.

With Congress due to recess at the end of this month, time is running out to repeal the law that requires the cuts.

The AMA leaders said that, if these cuts go into effect, thousands of doctors will be forced to stop taking Medicare and TRICARE patients rather than operating their offices at a loss. Medicare and TRICARE are virtually the lowest-paying insurance plans in the country and typically pay doctors 20% to 30% less than commercial plans.

"The military community's number one health care problem is finding doctors who will accept TRICARE," said Strobridge. "That's particularly true for Guard and Reserve families, retirees, and survivors who live in areas where there isn't a large military population."

"Reducing payment rates even further could have a devastating effect on health care access for military beneficiaries. When we send our service members in harm's way, the last thing they should have to worry about is whether their families will be able to find a TRICARE doctor, or whether their current doctor will stop seeing them."

"We must make sure Medicare and TRICARE provider payments don't fall even further behind reasonable standards that are recognized everywhere but in current law."

Please help this cause by visiting http://capwiz.com/moaa/home/ and clicking on the "Reverse Medicare/TRICARE Payment Cuts" link to send your legislators a MOAA-suggested message on the urgency of immediate action.

 

Let's try to show some true support of our troops and stop paying only lip service to the idea.

 

Kevin M. Benderman

   
Posted by BDT at 09:24:37 | Permanent Link | Comments (1) |

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

You Decide For Yourself

Report: Iraq War Made Terror 'Worse'
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/24/iraq/main2036338.shtml
CBS News Online

 Read this and make up your own mind.

 

Kevin M Benderman

Posted by BDT at 01:10:05 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |

Monday, September 25, 2006

Is this how we support our troops?

 This is a New York Times article about how we look out for our troops. I bet the people responsible for doing this have those stupid yellow magnets on their cars yet have the audacity to do this "in support of our troops".  

 

September 23, 2006

New York City’s Reservists Are Asked to Return Iraq Pay

When they were called up for military service in the wake of 9/11, hundreds of uniformed city workers in the Reserves faced the suspension of their city health and pension benefits. The city offered them an option: it would keep paying their salaries and continue their benefits, but when they returned they would have to repay the city their city salary or their military pay, whichever was less.

On its face, the offer made sense. And many reservists had only a few days to get their affairs together before shipping out — hardly enough time to consult accountants. Nearly all took the deal. As the war dragged on, more than 1,600 city employees, mostly police officers, signed up for the benefits program.

Now the bills from the city are coming due, for far more than many veterans imagined they would have to pay — as much as $200,000 — and often for more money than they ever received.

The city is demanding that the veterans repay their gross salaries, even though they never saw about a third of the money, which went for taxes and other deductions. The commissioner of administrative services, Martha K. Hirst, said veterans should be able to get back the difference between gross and take-home pay by amending their tax returns. But several tax accountants said the city had created an accounting quagmire.

David Gitel, a tax accountant in Manhattan, said that if the employees paid the money back over several years — which many will have to do — rather than in a lump sum, they could lose thousands of dollars in income-tax and social security payments.

“It’s an interesting experience,” Mr. Gitel said.

For now, the Police Department, which waited as much as four years to begin asking for the money back in the spring, is stepping up its collection efforts. On Thursday, hundreds of officers received letters in their pay envelopes threatening legal action if they did not make repayment arrangements within 15 days.

A city official, who was unwilling to be identified lest he incur his colleagues’ anger, gave an explanation for the delay. “People have been talking about it here for some time, about getting around to doing it,” he said. “It’s probably the hero thing. Why make a top priority of telling somebody to give back money when they just went off to war?”

Under the terms of the deal, nontaxable military housing and food allowances also count as military pay. Those allowances can nearly double military pay, in some cases making it more than city pay. Many veterans who did not read the fine print said they thought they would have to repay only their modest military take-home base salary.

On Monday, the City Council will consider a resolution by Councilman Michael E. McMahon of Staten Island to ask Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg to stop counting military allowances as income.

Assistant Police Chief Michael Collins said that after the letters went out on Thursday, many officers contacted the department to begin repayment. The department hopes to recover more than $15 million, he said.

Other officers said the system needed to be overhauled. “We have to change it,” Detective David Goodman, treasurer of the Police Department post of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said at a gathering on Tuesday of about 50 officers at the Army base at Fort Hamilton in Brooklyn, “so that when you come back you’re not paying money for having gone to war for your country.”

Detective Goodman added that since the war effort relies increasingly on reservists, it behooved the city to make enlistment attractive.

Ms. Hirst said the city was “looking at” the possibility of not counting military stipends as income, but she thought that in any case the benefits program was an excellent one.

“The city works out very, very friendly repayment agreements,” she said.

Many officers said the four-year delay had reinforced their impression that the city did not intend to come after them for the money at all.

Officer Jake Marino, a five-year police veteran who was in the Military Police in Iraq in 2004, recalled that while he was preparing to go, his contact in the department’s military-leave office told him, “As far as paying back the money, I don’t think you have anything to worry about.”

Many officers put one of their two salaries right in the bank, and some used it to make up for the loss of overtime pay. Others who started out saving the excess began to spend it when they did not hear from the city as time went by.

“Like most middle-class Americans,” said Michael Donohue, a police sergeant, “you get a windfall; you fix the roof and the sidewalk and pay off credit-card debt.” Sergeant Donohue, a command sergeant major in the Army Reserves who spent much of last year at Abu Ghraib, estimated that he owed the city $100,000.

The benefits plan was intended to let employees keep the larger of the two salaries. An officer paid $80,000 by the city and $60,000 by the military would owe the city $60,000 upon his return. And an employee paid $80,000 by the military and $60,000 by the city would also owe the city $60,000.

Administrative Services officials said that employees who pay the money back in a lump sum get an amended federal W2 tax form for the year they drew two salaries and would be able to get a full refund of the excess taxes they paid.

Employees who pay the money back by payroll deduction, though, could deduct the money from their income only in the year in which they pay it back, officials said.

This causes two problems, said Mr. Gitel, the tax accountant. One is that an employee would probably be in a higher tax bracket during the year she drew two salaries than when she paid the money back. The other problem, Mr. Gitel said, was that there was no way for the employee to get back the extra Medicare and Social Security contributions she made while drawing two salaries. These shortfalls could easily total $10,000, he said.

An Administrative Services official said last night that the city had just obtained commitments from accounting firms to provide free advice to veterans.

The city could have set its plan up differently. The state has a similar plan for its employees, but it pays them the difference, if any, between their military and state salaries, so they do not have to pay anything back. The state employees’ contributions to their pension accounts are not made while they are on leave, but the much larger state contribution is still made.

Laurence A. Levy, deputy counsel to Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani in 2001, said the city’s method seemed a better way to protect the employees’ benefits. “In Operation Desert Storm, many of the families didn’t get health benefits, and it caused tremendous financial hardship,” he said. “We wanted to keep them whole.”

Sergeant Donohue said he appreciated the city’s good intentions. “We’re not asking for a pity party or a handout,” he said. “But maybe there’s a little more reasonable way for them to be approaching this.”

 

If this makes you as mad as it does me then contact the New York City city council and the mayor an let them know what you think of this support of our troops.

 

Kevin M. Benderman

Posted by BDT at 10:04:08 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

ARE WE ALLOWING OURSELVES TO BECOME A POLICE STATE?

This is a prime example of the government trying to turn America into a police state.

                   CNN.com - Senate GOP torpedoes proposed limits on Bush wiretaps - Sep 13, 2006*  

 

And this is why the American people are going to have to awaken from their apathetic state if we hope to remain a country with a representative form of government that does the will of the people instead of the will of the large corporations or lobbyists. We are also going to have to be willing to hold those politicians accountable for the national laws they break as they go about trying to use this country as a springboard for their own personal gain.

 

As I read this story I just sat back and had to shake my head about what WE THE PEOPLE have let America be turned into. We are responsible for letting the government intrude into our daily lives by letting them feel that we need them for every little thing. Americans seem to want someone else to do everything for him or her and to never want to do anything for him or herself. I wonder what the previous generations of Americans who fought and died to give us what we have would think if they could see what we have allowed this country to turn into. 

 

 I went to our capital over the weekend and I went into the National Archives where I saw the originals of the documents that founded this nation. I felt the power of the words like never before when I saw the actual signatures of men like Thomas Jefferson on the Declaration of Independence and the signatures of men like George Washington on the United States Constitution. These men did not look on these documents as some abstract idea the way we seem to do today.  No, these men had a blood stake in these documents. Washington fought at Valley Forge in order to bring the freedom and independence that we have today. He shed blood and put forth great effort to bring about the ideals of freedom that we today so freely take for granted even if we care about them at all. 

 

 All Americans are going to have stop their whining about what the government owes them and they are going to have to start watching what the elected officials do so that we may ensure that we do not let despots and megalomaniacs pervert our nation into a totalitarian regime that serves only them. The nation does not owe anyone anything as much as it has the potential to give if you are willing to work to get it. Yes, there have been some dark moments in the history of this nation and we cannot go back to change what has happened but we can start tearing down these imaginary barriers from between us. These barriers are a very effective device designed to let the people who are concerned only with their own agenda keep us at each others throats while they are taking everything that your forefathers meant for you to have. 

 

 Americans are going to have realize that the two political parties in power today are not there for the benefit of Americans but they are there for the benefit of the party. If you really watch what they do and listen to what they say then you would see that. I still believe the majority of Americans are in the middle of the extremes and the parties now in power are attempting to portray themselves as the champion of either extreme.

 

 Well, America, I suggest that you wake up and realize that we do not need another political party or politician to allow us to have what they think we need. It is time for all Americans to stop the downward spiral we have allowed to happen in this country and to start working together to fix the problems that confront us. Our constitution not only gives us the right to do so but it expects nothing less.

 

KEVIN M BENDERMAN                

Posted by BDT at 22:07:02 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

TRUE SUPPORT OF OUR TROOPS

 I wrote this a while back and never posted it. I think it is as pertinent now as then. Although I must admit many more people than I thought are stading up to what is happening in our country.  Have heart, America, all is not lost to people who do not care about this country as a whole.  WE THE PEOPLE are going to be heard whether or not the ones that choose not follow our constitution want to hear. 
 
 
I AM WRITING THIS TO RECOGNIZE THE SACRIFICES OUR TROOPS HAVE MADE AND TO SUPPORT THEM AS THEY FACE ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT PERIODS IN RECENT HISTORY. THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT HAVE ORGANIZED UNDER THE BANNER OF SUPPORTING THE TROOPS AND THE ONLY THING THEY SEEM TO WANT TO TELL THE SOLDIERS AND OTHER SERVICE MEMBERS IS TO RUN FROM WHAT THEY ARE NOW FACING. I MUST SAY THAT TELLING THEM TO TURN THEIR BACK ON THE COUNTRY AND TO RUN OR GO A.W.O.L IS THE WRONG ANSWER. I BELIEVE THAT STAYING AND STANDING FOR WHAT YOU KNOW TO BE RIGHT IS THE WAY TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUES FACING OUR COUNTRY TODAY.
 THERE ARE SOME WHO FEEL THIS MAY BE TOO DIFFICULT TO HANDLE AND I CAN PERSONALLY TELL THEM IT IS A DIFFICULT DECISION TO FOLLOW YOUR CONSCIENCE WHEN YOU KNOW IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I SPENT 13 MONTHS OF A 15-MONTH SENTENCE IMPOSED BY THE COMMAND GROUP AT FT. STEWART, GA. FOR DOING WHAT I KNOW TO BE THE RIGHT THING. IF WE TRULY WANT TO MAKE SOME POSITIVE CHANGES FOR OUR NATION THEN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STEP OUT OF OUR COMFORT ZONE.
THERE ARE MANY ARE ALSO PORTRAYING THIS AS A WAY TO END ALL WARS. THIS POSITION DISPLAYS DISRESPECT TO OUR SERVICE MEMBERS BECAUSE WE ARE IGNORING OUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS CITIZENS. IF WE EXPECT THE SOLDIERS TO RUN FROM OUR LAWS WHEN WE SHOULD BE STANDING UP FOR THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THEN WE ARE ABDICTATING OUR RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE SERVICE MEMBERS.WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING IS ORGANIZING OURSELVES INTO WELL-MANAGED GROUPS OF UNITED STATES CITIZENS WHO ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY GIVEN TO US BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. THAT RESPONSIBILITY WAS NOT GIVEN TO US LIGHTLY AND WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE LET IT BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED. BUT WE HAVE AND IT IS UP TO US TO STAND UP AND TAKE BACK WHAT IT IS OURS.
I SEE MANY PEOPLE WHO CLAIM TO HAVE THE SERVICE MEMBERS’ BEST INTERESTS IN MIND WHEN THESE TYPES OF STATEMENTS ARE BEING MADE. I THINK THESE PEOPLE HAVE MISSED THE MARK WHEN IT COMES TO UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MILITARY IS UNDER CIVIL CONTROL AND UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, “WE THE PEOPLE” ARE THE CIVIL AUTHORITY.WE CANNOT EXPECT THE SOLDIERS TO DO THE JOB OF BEING WATCHDOGS OVER WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS DOING. WE SHOULD NEVER LET ELECTED OFFICIALS ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES THAT BRING ABOUT THE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD PUT OUR MILITARY PERSONNEL INTO HARM’S WAY FOR TRANSIENT OR MISGUIDED REASONS.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WHO WEAR THE FLAG UPSIDE DOWN AS A WAY TO DISPLAY THEIR OPINIONS OF HOW THINGS ARE BEING DONE BY SOME MEMBERS OF OUR GOVERNMENT. I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THOSE WEARING THE FLAG THIS WAY THAT THIS COUNTRY IS MUCH MORE THAN ONE OFFICE HOLDER. THIS COUNTRY IS THE TOTAL EFFORT OF ALL LIVING HERE NOW AND ALL THOSE WHO HAVE COME BEFORE US. JUST BECAUSE SOME INDIVIDUAL DECIDES TO DO THINGS DETRIMENTAL TO THE NATION DOESN’T MEAN WE SHOULD DISRESPECT THE IDEALS THE COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON.  IT IS UP TO US TO ENSURE THAT THE GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS MADE UP OF A GROUP OF EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES, IS NEVER VIOLATING THE PRINCIPLES OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BREAK OUT OF THEIR APATHY AND START PARTICIPATING MORE ACTIVELY IN WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS DOING.
WE MUST ENSURE THAT OUR GOVERNMENT REMAINS ACCOUNTABLE TO US AND THAT IT REMAINS OPEN AND TRANSPARENT SO THAT WE MAY SEE WHAT IS BEING UNDERTAKEN BY OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. WE HAVE THE INHERENT RESPONSIBILITY AS UNITED STATES CITIZENS TO DO SO.
I WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE THIS STATEMENT WITH A QUOTE FROM JOHN F. KENNEDY,
“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers, which are cited to justify it. ”
John F. Kennedy, 27 April 1961
 NEVER HAS SUCH A STATEMENT BEEN MORE RELEVANT OR NEEDED IN OUR COUNTRY AS IT IS NOW. 
                                                                                                                                                                                   Kevin M Benderman
Posted by BDT at 02:51:54 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |