|
Who
We Are
Articles
Upcoming
Events
Past
Events
Downloads
Links
No
Child Left Behind
Political
Cartoons
Contact
Us
|
70's Law Costs 61,000 Military Widows Thousands of Dollars in Survivor Benefits
LIZETTE ALVAREZ, New York Times
August 19, 2006
As many as 61,000 military widows whose husbands died of causes
relating to their military service lose out on thousands of dollars a
year in survivor benefits because of a law that dates from the 1970's.
Widows and retirees have spent decades trying to persuade Congress to
change the law, which hits hardest at the widows of lower-ranking
service members and is referred to by many critics as the ''widow's
tax.''
The Senate passed such a change last year and again this year as part
of the military authorization bill. But House Republican leaders oppose
the change because of its steep price tag, nearly $9 billion over 10
years, Senate legislative aides from both parties say. A change was not
in the military bill that passed the House, but lawmakers who support
the change are hoping to make it part of the bill's final version,
which is now being worked on by a bipartisan Congressional committee.
''My husband thought he was securing my future,'' said Edie Smith, a
member of the Gold Star Wives, a group of military widows who are
lobbying to change the law. ''He didn't realize his own disability
would void the benefit he purchased for me.''
A 1972 law created the Survivor Benefits Plan, a Department of Defense
retirement income fund similar to a life insurance policy. The plan, in
turn, pays benefits calculated according to a dead service member's
rank and length of service.
In addition, widows of veterans who died of service-related causes
receive monthly cash stipends from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Known as the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation stipend, it is
currently $1,033 plus $257 for each child.
But under the law, which placed restrictions on the plan that it
created, the payment to widows enrolled in the Survivor Benefits Plan
is reduced, dollar for dollar, by the amount of the Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation stipend.
For example, a widow who would be entitled to $1,000 from the Survivor
Benefits Plan and the $1,033 Dependency and Indemnity stipend receives
$1,033, not $2,033.
Widows whose husband paid into the plan are reimbursed their premiums,
without interest, but the amount is taxed and does not make up the
losses from the plan.
The Department of Defense opposes changing the law to allow both
payments, arguing that survivors should not receive two separate
benefits for a single death.
But widows and their supporters say that the Pentagon's opposition to a
change in the law really stems from its cost, especially at a time of
rising expenses for the war in Iraq.
They also argue that because service members paid into the Survivors Benefits Plan, its benefits should not be reduced.
''If you take one benefit from another, you don't leave the survivor
with very much,'' said Col. Lee Lange, the deputy director of
government relations for the influential Military Officers Association
of America, which has made this issue a priority. ''These are widows.
Let them collect both.''
Juan del Castillo, a retired Coast Guard commander who has been paying
into the plan since 1972, accused the Pentagon of ''stealing money from
widows.''
''They are financing their operation from money stolen from military
widows,'' Mr. Castillo said. ''They have been doing that since 1972.''
Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida, who has pushed for five years
to change the law, said he had allies in the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee, Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, and
the committee's ranking Democrat, Senator Carl Levin of Michigan. The
$9 billion price tag needed to insure a full payout under both plans
sounds expensive, Mr. Nelson said, but is less than the price of a
single aircraft carrier.
''Widows and orphans are made as a result of war,'' he said. ''They are
victims of war. They are giving the ultimate sacrifice, and the nation
has an obligation to care for them.''
In the last two years, Congress has passed several bills to ease
restrictions in the Survivor Benefits Plan. It ended a reduction in
benefits to widows who reached the age of 62. And in 2003, as more and
more women were widowed because of the war in Iraq, Congress decided to
allow those whose husbands died after Nov. 23, 2003, to receive money
from both funds by designating surviving children instead of wives as
beneficiaries. But that does not affect the vast number of the 61,000
widows whose husbands died before that date.
Representative Duncan Hunter, Republican of California and chairman of
the House Armed Services Committee, does not support including the
change in this year's military authorization bill. But he has said
Congress is doing right by the widows, pointing out that last year it
approved significant increases in life insurance payouts and death
benefits.
That ''should have been done a long time ago,'' Mr. Hunter said.
This archive consists of a topically organized selection of
articles culled by members of the Counter-Recruitment List Serve from printed
publications and web sites. The archive is not complete. We have chosen
material relevant to the work of Eugene,
Oregon’s Committee for Countering
Military Recruitment that we think may be of use to others individuals and
groups with similar goals.
Because our web site is public, personal comments about the
articles and (frequent) corrections of reporters’ errors are also not included.
If an article interests you, we encourage you to return to the
Counter-Recruitment List Serve and put the article’s headline into the search
line, which should bring up (often wise and useful) commentary and corrections.
If you do not belong to the List Serve, it can be found at counter-recruitment@yahoogroups.com
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles
on this site are posted without profit to those who have expressed prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposed.
|