[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 36 (Monday, March 19, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Page S2471]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  RETIRED PAY RESTORATION ACT OF 2001

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be a cosponsor of the 
Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2001, which corrects a long-standing 
inequity that has resulted in a major slap in the face of our dedicated 
service men and women.
  Current law bans so-called concurrent receipt of VA disability 
compensation and military retired pay, so that the amount of any VA 
disability payment to a military retiree is subtracted from the monthly 
retirement check. In operation, this rule seems to turn logic and 
common sense on its head, and its repeal is long overdue.
  Let's be clear what we're talking about. This provision only applies 
to military retirees, those who have served their country in uniform 
for at least 20 years. Such retirees receive a taxable monthly pension 
based on their length of service and their final pay, which is 
determined primarily by their rank and length of service. In this 
regard, the military retirement pay system resembles the civil service 
retirement system with which we are all familiar.
  VA disability compensation is completely different. VA disability 
compensation consists of tax-free monthly payments to veterans who 
served in uniform for any length of time and who, during their time in 
the military, incurred a service-connected disability. These monthly 
payments are based only on the severity of the disability and nothing 
else: not on the length of service, the person's rank, the active duty 
pay, and so on.
  So at first blush, it seems that there is no logical reason why VA 
disability compensation should be offset against military retired pay: 
they are disbursed for completely different reasons and are calculated 
by totally different methods.
  But the incongruities of the present rules are nothing short of mind-
boggling. Let us hypothesize that twins Jack and Jill sign up for the 
military at age 18. After 1 year in the military, Jack and Jill both 
incur identical knee injuries after stepping into a hole while running 
the obstacle course. The military disability system evaluates both Jack 
and Jill, confirms a mild disability in both due to intermittent 
swelling and locking of the knee, but determines that this disability 
is not severe enough to render them unfit for continued military 
service.
  At this point, Jack and Jill decide to pursue separate paths. Jack 
decides to leave the military when his enlistment is up, at age 22, and 
joins the Federal civil service in the Defense Department as a 
procurement specialist. Immediately after leaving the service, Jack 
applies to the VA for disability compensation, which is granted, and 
Jack then receives monthly payments from the VA for the rest of his 
life. At age 55, Jack retires from the Federal civil service and begins 
receiving his full monthly civil service retirement check in addition 
to the VA disability compensation that he has been receiving all along.
  Jill, on the other hand, decides to stay in the military after her 
injury, working as a procurement specialist. Of course, while she 
remains in the military, she receives no VA disability compensation, 
even though her twin Jack is receiving VA disability payments for the 
same injury all along. At age 55, Jill retires from the military, and 
starts to receive monthly military retirement checks. Jill applies to 
the VA for disability compensation based on her knee injury, and it is 
granted. However, when she begins to receive her VA disability checks, 
the amount of those checks is subtracted from her monthly military 
retirement pay.
  How can we rationalize this disparate treatment of Jack and Jill? We 
can't. It makes no sense that those in uniform who suffer a service-
connected disability end up being penalized for deciding to remain in 
the military, while those who leave the military are amply rewarded.The 
longer you serve in the military, the more you are penalized. Does this 
make sense? I don't think so.
  Or let's consider another option. Twins John and Jane both enter the 
military at the same time, serve in the same position, and retire at 
the same age. Both receive the same monthly retired pay. John has 
incurred a service-connected injury, and after retirement, he is 
granted a disability compensation from the VA. Jane was never injured 
in the military. However, they both end up getting the same amount of 
pay, since John's VA disability payment is subtracted from his military 
retired pay. Does it make sense that we have an elaborate system for 
disability compensation that ends up treating the injured John and the 
uninjured Jane the same? I don't think so.
  The logical inconsistencies of the present rules are overwhelming. It 
is time to repeal the provision in current law that prohibits military 
retirees from receiving concurrent receipt of full military retirement 
pay along with VA disability compensation. Those who put their lives at 
risk by putting on the uniform of this country, and who are then 
disabled as a result of their military service, must be treated fairly 
and awarded all the benefits they have earned and which they deserve. 
To do any less makes a mockery of the sacrifices of all our service men 
and women.

                          ____________________