PRESS RELEASE #45
Federal Protection of Veteran’s Disability Compensation Non-existent?
By Staff Writer: Rick Townsend
November 18, 2006
According to free lance writer Jim Strickland, many Vets are under the mistaken impression that their disability is protected and it isn't. Strickland is probably best known for his contributions to www.VAwatchdog.org, a grassroots veteran’s advocatory group headed up by Larry Scott.
In a recent email exchange between Jim Strickland and a group of disabled veterans going through divorce, Strickland provided his interpretation of the law. " U.S. Code, Title 38, §5301(a), which states in part: Nonassignability and exempt status of benefits Payments of benefits due or to become due under any law administered by the Secretary shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically authorized by law, and such payments made to, or on account of, a beneficiary shall be exempt from taxation, shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not be liable to attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary." The catch phrase here is of course, "shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically authorized by law" and that's where the rule has a loophole. VA disability compensation is not protected," Strickland wrote.
Long time veteran’s rights advocate Jere Beery of Jefferson Ohio takes issue with Strickland’s statements. “The problem here is enforcement of USC, Title 38. §5301(a). The federal Code is very clearly worded and extremely focused on the protection of veterans’ entitlements from 3rd party awards. There is no federal law that relinquishes control of veteran’s disability compensation over to state judges. To say there is a ‘loophole’ in the law that makes it ‘OK’ to ignore the entire law is the most asinine logic I have ever heard,” Beery stated. “The Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs is the only person that can attach to veteran’s benefits. These state judges are over-stepping their authority and illegally striping veterans of their earned entitlements, and no one is doing a damn thing about it,” Beery added
In another email Strickland accuses Beery of being upset over his personal divorce ruling. “I'm seeing the big picture now. It took me a while. You're just a pissed off guy, right? Pissed at the ex, pissed at this judge, now you're pissed at me for some reason. Everyone else is wrong, you're always the one who sees the truth,” Strickland wrote.
Jere Beery said he thinks this attitude is at the root of a much bigger problem. “Unfortunately, many uninformed Americans think like Mr. Strickland does. For some unknown reason people like Strickland wrongly conclude veteran’s disability compensation is a divisible asset. In their minds, 5301(a) does not exist in the first place, because it protects nothing. That is a very sad reality, because I really think Congress was attempting to protect veterans’ benefits,” Beery told the FBN.
At one point in the email exchange Jere Beery suggested Strickland take a trip to Walter Reed Hospital and tell the troops recovering there that their disability benefits were not protected. "I'm not sure why you would think that's my responsibility? I worked there once, doubt you've ever been. I tell you a truth about the system you don't want to hear and suddenly all the wounded at WRH are my responsibility? I doubt it," Strickland replied.
In a related story, Calvin Murphy’s case has been postponed indefinitely.
As always, the FBN would like to hear from you concerning this issue. Please send your comments to Rick Townsend > firebaseadrian@tc3net.com