On June 6, 2011, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced a bill which specifically requires VA to have a doctor of chiropractic staff at all of its major facilities by 2014. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Thomas Harkin (D-IA), Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS), Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).
Currently, chiropractic care is only available at a few VA facilities across the country, and many major metropolitan areas are currently without doctors of chiropractic care. If enacted this legislation would presumably allow all veterans to have access to chiropractic care at any VA facility and would also allow VA to have more treatment providers on hand to assist veterans that suffer from musculoskeletal disabilities. This could potentially increase the number of veterans who seek treatment from a chiropractor and possibly reduce the length of time veterans with musculoskeletal disabilities wait for treatment.
Without this bill, further expansion of chiropractic care to VA facilities would be on a case-by-case basis and would probably experience significant delays.
The text of the legislation may be found at http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s1147/text.
Nancy L Foti FAQs, Veterans Benefits Legislation, veterans health care Veterans Benefits Legislation, veterans health care, Veterans legislation
On May 5, 2011, a bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate to provide a cost-of-living adjustment in the benefits paid to those receiving disability compensation, compensation for dependents, clothing allowances, dependency and indemnity compensation benefits, and dependency and indemnity compensation benefits for children.
U.S. Senator Patty Murray of Washington, the chairperson of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, and every member of the Committee co-sponsored the legislation.
If enacted, this legislation would not establish a set amount paid. Rather, the amount paid would be increased based on increases in the Consumer Price Index, which is the leading indicator of cost of living in America. That is, if the cost of living in America increases by 3% then VA compensation benefits will be increased by 3% automatically. The payment rates would be calculated yearly, rounded down to the nearest whole dollar. Any increases in compensation would be based on the rates in effect on November 30, 2011.
The bill would remove from the political process adjustments in compensation paid to veterans and their dependents and guarantee an adjustment in compensation that keeps pace with the cost of living.
The text of the legislation may be found at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.894: .
Todd M Wesche Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation, Veterans legislation
Recently, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a budget amendment that, if enacted into law, would essentially invoke a seven-month moratorium on payment of all legal fees by the government to those who successfully litigate a matter against it. Such payments are currently authorized under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).
In 1980, Congress established EAJA in response to its concern that people may be deterred from seeking review of, or defending against, unreasonable governmental action because of the expense involved in suing the government to vindicate their rights. Congress expressly made payment of legal fees under the EAJA available to veterans and their dependents who hire private attorneys to represent them at the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and if they win the case against the government in that court.
If the budget amendment becomes law, EAJA fees would be temporarily suspended. Because there does not appear to be a distinction between those people who would be affected by the broad moratorium, veterans and their dependents would likely suffer because attorneys rely on reimbursement of reasonable attorney fees under EAJA in order to provide low or no cost services. If the attorneys are not awarded attorney fees in successful appeals, it is unlikely that they would agree to represent veterans and their dependents before the court. This will negatively affect those who have been unfairly denied benefits by VA and need the expertise of an attorney skilled in the area of veteran’s benefits law to litigate the matter at the Court.
To see the EAJA deliberations, check out http://www.scribd.com/doc/49535676/EAJA-Deliberations
David J Lowenstein Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation Veterans Benefits Claims, veterans disability benefits, Veterans Disability claims, Veterans legislation
On June 1, 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed a bill proclaiming November 11th as Veterans Day, which was formerly known as Armistice Day. Veterans Day was established to recognize and honor the men and women who have served in the United States Armed Forces. Although Veterans Day marks a day in which we remember those who died during service, it is designed to thank and honor all of those who have served and continue to service.
Today, on November 11, 2010, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki discussed the sacrifices made by men and women who have served in the United States military and the difficulties many of them face. Below is a link to the actual discussion and a summary of the key points addressed.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/11/11/131239678/veterans-day?ft=1&f=1001
Goodman, Allen & Filetti would like to thank all of the men and women who have and continue to serve our country.
David J Lowenstein Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation Allen & Filetti, Goodman, Veterans Day, veterans disability benefits
A question we often hear from our clients regards what happens to a claim that has not yet been decided or is still pending at his or her death. Fortunately, Congress recently changed the rules regarding how the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) handles such claims. The rules are less clear for claims that are on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
Congress now allows for survivors of the person filing a claim (known as a “claimant”) to pick up the claim where the claimant left it upon his or her death if the claim is pending before VA at either the VA regional office (or Agency of Original Jurisdiction) or the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. This process is known as “substitution.” In effect, the survivor is permitted to continue pursuing the original claim at exactly the same point where it was upon the claimant’s death, and this allows VA to pay to the survivor any benefits that otherwise would have been paid to the original claimant. The law permitting substitution is at 38 U.S.C. § 5121A.
In order for VA to allow substitution, there are some basic requirements that must be met. First, a survivor must ask VA to be substituted for the deceased claimant within one year of death. If this deadline is missed, substitution will not be permitted. Second, the survivor must meet certain criteria to be deemed eligible. Generally, the survivor must be the deceased claimant’s legal spouse, a child, or a dependent parent. The full list of eligible persons is available at 38 U.S.C. § 5121(a).
The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has now decided that a survivor may be substituted in a case that is pending at the Court at the time of the claimant’s death.
Todd M Wesche FAQs, Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation Veterans Disability claims
In late May 2010, VA Secretary Eric Shinseki prepared a letter to the leaders of the House and Senate requesting that his draft legislation entitled “Veterans Benefit Programs Improvement Act of 2010” be considered and enacted. The purpose of the draft bill is to improve (1) VA’s compensation and pension programs, (2) the timeliness and efficiency of VA’s adjudication of claims and appeals, (3) VA’s loan guaranty system, (4) vocational rehabilitation and education benefits, and (5) Veterans Group Life Insurance participants. Details of the particulars with respect to the suggested changes and reasons for them can be viewed at: http://www.vawatchdog.org/10/nf10/nfmay10/may10files/SecyLegislation.pdf
While it is clear that many of the proposed changes appear good for veterans, there are several items that have surfaced that may negatively impact the legal representation of veterans.
Under Title II, Section 206, which concerns decisions of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, the legal standard of what the Board must include in its decisions may change. VA is concerned that more than half of the claims appealed to the Veterans Court result in a remand back to the Board due to an inadequate statement of reasons or bases. The comments to the proposed change note, among others, that while some remands are necessary, many remands based on reasons or bases do not benefit the claimant. Therefore, changing the statutory language from reasons or bases to “a plausible statement of the reasons for the Board’s ultimate findings of fact and conclusions of law” would reduce the number of remands.
Under Title II, Section 207, which addresses the definition of prevailing party status for purposes of entitlement to Equal Access to Justice Act, i.e., reimbursement of attorney fees, the proposed language is alarming. If the language is adopted, attorneys who represent veterans before the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims would only be eligible for reimbursement of attorney fees if, after securing a remand or reversal at the appellate level, the veteran ultimately is awarded a monetary or other benefit at the administrative level. The language further allows the Court and the Secretary to prescribe rules that would allow the Court to retain control over all remands, and only upon a showing that the veteran was awarded benefits, could the attorney be entitled to reimbursement of fees.
If either of these proposed changes become law, it is likely to negatively impact the number of attorneys willing to represent veterans at the court level. If attorneys know that the chances of recovering attorney fees is limited and that it will be that much more difficult to secure remands, the Veterans Court will likely see many more unrepresented claimants.
David J Lowenstein FAQs, Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation Veterans Benefits Claims, Veterans Benefits Legislation, veterans disability benefits