FREDERICK — A long-standing federal policy continues to reduce retirement pay for tens of thousands of combat-injured veterans, prompting renewed calls for congressional action.
WATCH: Combat-injured veterans forced to choose between retirement and benefits pay
The policy affects service members who are medically retired and eligible for both military retirement pay and Veterans Affairs disability compensation. Under current law, veterans must forfeit a portion of their military retirement pay if they receive VA disability benefits. This is a requirement supporters of reform often refer to as the “Wounded Veteran Tax.”
Marine Corps veteran Adam Kishleski is among those impacted.
Kishleski joined the Marine Corps straight out of high school and deployed to Iraq just months after the September 11th attacks. Only weeks into his deployment, he was critically injured by a 97-pound improvised explosive device.
“I was in Iraq for just over a month when I got blown up breaching a door,” Kishleski said.
The explosion ended his deployment and his military career.
“I was fortunate enough to make it out alive but ended up losing my left arm and my right leg,” he said.
Kishleski spent more than a year recovering at Bethesda and Walter Reed, relearning how to walk and adjust to life after his injuries. Like many combat-wounded service members, he was medically retired.
It was during his separation from the military that he says he learned how retirement and disability benefits would affect him financially.
“At the time, the military had VA disability pay or military retirement pay made available to you, and you could choose to receive one or the other,” Kishleski said. “But if you chose the VA disability pay, they would back out your military retirement dollar for dollar.”
The offset is rooted in federal law.
According to statute, “current law generally prohibits an individual from receiving two types of government payments for the same period of service (38 U.S.C. 5304[a]). As a result, there is a dollar-for-dollar offset in place for veterans who are eligible for both military retired pay and VADC.”
Military retirement pay is typically reduced by the amount of VA disability compensation received in order to prevent what lawmakers have historically described as “double-dipping.”
Some groups of veterans are exempt from the rule or qualify for special compensation programs that reduce the offset. However, veteran advocacy organizations like Wounded Warrior Project have raised concerns, arguing that retirement pay and disability compensation serve different purposes.
Advocacy groups maintain that retirement pay is earned through years of service, while disability compensation is meant to account for injuries sustained during service.
“If you’re a postman and you got hit by a car and were forced into retirement, you’d receive both your disability pay and your retirement,” Kishleski said. “It’s rather disappointing that our military veterans aren’t treated the same way.”
The Major Richard Star Act would allow combat-injured veterans who were medically retired to receive both full military retirement pay and VA disability compensation.
Supporters estimate the change would affect roughly 50,000 veterans nationwide.
In the House, the bill has more than 300 co-sponsors but remains stalled in committee. Six out of eight Maryland representatives have cosponsored the bill. Congressmen Andy Harris and Steny Hoyer did not sign on.
In the Senate, a companion bill is currently sitting in the Armed Services Committee. Both Senators from Maryland have signed on.
When asked about the status of the House legislation, a representative from the office of Gus Bilirakis provided the following statement:
“The Major Richard Star Act remains a top priority for Congressman Bilirakis. He has held multiple meetings with senior Department of War officials, as well as House and Senate leadership, to determine the best path forward for advancing this legislation. The Congressman will continue working to correct the injustice of concurrent receipt faced by these combat-wounded veterans.”
For veterans like Kishleski, the legislation represents more than a financial change.
“It would mean a great deal to me,” he said. “To know that our politicians care to take care of our veterans after something so significant happens.”
Kishleski also said he believes the issue carries implications for future service members.
“Make it clear to everyone who puts their name on a blank check that if something happens, their country is going to take care of them,” he said.
As Congress continues to debate the legislation, the policy remains in place, leaving thousands of combat-injured veterans subject to the offset.
