TRICARE Fee Increases
As an American and a Veteran, I struggle with being a responsible citizen and being a retiree entitled to benefits from my government. There is no denying that our country is at a crossroads in regards to financial stability. In these uncertain times our elected leaders should put all financial expenditures “on the table” and each should be critically examined to ensure any money spent is in the best interest of the country. One area that has normally been off limits to reductions is benefits to our military personnel and to some extent, our military retirees.
Probably the most notable item being looked at right now is TRICARE. The DoD spends a lot of money on this program, in fact the 2012 budget asked for over $52 billion to take care of the military, retirees, and their dependents. There are four basic healthcare groups within DoD:
- Active Duty
- Active Duty Dependents
- Retirees under age 65 and their dependents
- Retirees over age 65 and their dependents
Out of these four groups only one is seeing substantial growth, Retirees under age 65 and their dependents. Because of this growth, this group is starting to be targeted.
Some officials in our government seem bewildered that working age military retirees are using TRICARE vs. programs through their civilian or government employer. They have said that military retirees are “flocking” to TRICARE because it is cheaper that what can be procured through their employer. I worked with hundreds of people in the military that went on to retire and I can say I have never met anyone that did not use TRICARE when they left the service instead of a more expensive civilian program, even back in late 1990s when TRICARE was enacted. Anyone that thinks military retirees intended to use TRICARE as a second payer is fooling themselves. I highly doubt that Congress believed that TRICARE would be a second payer system when they created this law either. Simply put, TRICARE is a benefit that has been used as a recruiting and retention tool to entice people to enlist and stay with the military for an entire career.
There was a recent article in the Washington Post that in my eyes vilified military retirees who are opposed to a $60/year increase to TRICARE. I even look at myself as being greedy as I take a stance to oppose this increase. If this was a onetime $60 increase that would be one thing, but DoD also wants to attach an unknown annual percentage increase to this amount. On top of that, The Military Coalition provided numerous suggestions to the DoD to decrease the cost of healthcare with little success because the suggestions seem to fall on deaf ears. In the end, we retirees look greedy because we oppose a $5.00/month increase for our health care this year while nobody is taking into consideration what we may be paying 20 years from now.
My frustration with this issue amplified in February when I finally received my disability rating from the VA. While my 30% disability rating was "reasonably fair" in my opinion, I now lose $452 of my retired pay each month. Although this money is offset with my disability payment, the retirement I earned for 28 years of service has now been reduced by 13%, how awesome is that?
Maybe there is some middle ground in giving retirees full concurrent receipt, regardless of disability rating, and increasing TRICARE rates to a level everyone can live with. For now I’ll continue to oppose this increase and direct DoD to the $452 they aren’t paying me each month to offset increased TRICARE costs.
Gary Swanson, SMSgt (ret), AFSA Chapter 872