Injustice in the line of duty

Washington Times ^ | Nov. 23, 2007 | Wa Times

[AuntB]

Stories like Iraq veteran Jordan Fox's are the reason the English language contains words like "Kafkaesque." This Army enlistee was seriously injured in Iraq by an improvised-explosive device ......left him blind in one eye and struggling with other serious injuries. While recuperating at home, a letter arrived from the Pentagon. It demanded that he repay $3,000 of his $10,000 enlistment bonus. The reason: He could not fulfill the remainder of his service.

The Pentagon has since corrected itself, claiming that the letter was sent in error......

... In a more recent example, ...... reported on Army Spc. Ronald Hinkle, who suffered a traumatic brain injury after an IED explosion cut short his military career. Not only was Spc. Hinkle owed $2,500 in back salary, but two months after NPR's story aired, he was notified that a $3,000 enlistment bonus would not be paid because he "failed to fulfill his contract" — by way of suffering serious injury in the line of duty.

Amid the latest flurry of attention comes the "Veterans Guaranteed Bonus Act," a bipartisan House bill which would require the Pentagon to pay out all bonuses to combat-wounded service members within 30 days. .....

A spokesman for Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican and ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said that Mr. Hunter supports the intent but stresses that such a policy is already in place. The problem is that it isn't implemented aggressively enough.

Mr. Altmire's bill is limited to combat casualties. Why not pay out bonuses for all service members injured in the line of duty, combat-related or not, overseas or on base at home? It is only right. Reps. Altmire, Hunter and friends are on the right tracks: congressional pressure and aggressive implementation. But we encourage them both to think bigger.

[AuntB]

" Mr. Hunter supports the intent but stresses that such a policy is already in place. "

Once again, Duncan Hunter trying to be prudent and logical.

[traditional1]

No one with any common sense would expound on this error in sending out the letters, as the law clearly states that combat-injuries do NOT result in refunds being due.

This is merely a talking point for both sides on the War issue; where "Bush's fault" can be shouted by Democrats, and Republicans can "rally" around a non-issue where THEY are in support of the heroes.

[ExTexasRedhead]

We all owe our American patriots, especially the wounded, priority care which includes medical and financial, first and more most, before any “give away” and/or pork barrel garbage including any benefits to “illegals.” IMO, the US Congress needs to be sent packing and we need to start over.

[hinckley buzzard]

Having worked for the VA for some time I saw multitudes of these bureaucratic screw-ups. They are infuriating but almost always rectified in short order. It is not valid to use them as some kind of measure of the government's policies toward veterans.

[RedStateRocker]

Well why the hell isn’t the commander in chief on the horn to whatever dingbat at the pentagon is in charge of such letters being sent out and telling them to *STOP*?
Please, is the president so busy that he can’t have a two sentence memo sent to the pentagon?

[traditional1]

"Well why the hell isn’t the commander in chief on the horn"

I suspect that the situation is being rectified already, but it won't stop the MSM from attacking Bush even if he has already addressed the screwup.

My point is that grand-standing by those who want to get themselves air time over a beauraucratic oversight is not indicative of being "more concerned" than those who are not identified as being incensed, or those who actually CAUGHT the error.