[280PLUS]

Colorado Springs Gazette
July 9, 2005
Military Update

By Tom Philpott
In February, a week after returning from his second tour in Iraq, Marine Lt. Col. Richard Wersel Jr., 43, had a fatal heart attack while lifting weights in a base gymnasium at Camp Lejeune, N.C.

Had the decorated Marine died under identical circumstances in Iraq, his widow, Vivianne, would be eligible for an additional $238,000 in death benefits to help raise her two children, ages 12 and 14.

But Congress, adopting a plan agreed to by top Pentagon civilians but opposed by military leaders, established the first two-tier military death benefits package. It also voted to pay the higher benefits retroactively for war zone deaths and combat-training or hazardous duty deaths, back to Oct. 7, 2001, the start of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.

Denying the increases to survivors of 3,000 other service members who died on active duty since late 2001 has begun to raise morale-jarring issues for military leaders, the kind they warned Congress that a two-tier benefit might create.

Vivianne Wersel said she has no doubt that multiple deployments over 30 months, including a trip to Central and South America to train indigenous troops to fight drug traffickers, were the “silent bullet” that took her husband’s life. Before his death, she said, Rich had no history of heart disease, hypertension or cholesterol problems.

His final assignment was with Multi-National Force Iraq in Baghdad, serving as plans chief for the Civil Military Operations Directorate. Vivianne heard from colleagues that Rich had worked many long days there, under tight deadlines, in a tense environment that included mortar attacks.

Vivianne said she isn’t angry with the Marine Corps whose efforts to help her and the children have been “fantastic.”
“Rich died doing what he loved most,” she said. “Even going to Iraq the second time, if he had to do it over again, he would have gone. But don’t deny my children benefits as if he wasn’t a casualty of war.”

The Defense Department has begun to pay retroactively the higher death benefits approved as part of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror and Tsunami Relief Act 2005.

The lump sum death gratuity is now $100,000, up from $12,420, for survivors of members who die in a combat zone or while training for combat or performing hazardous duty.

Sept. 1, maximum coverage under Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) also will climb for all service members to $400,000, up from $250,000. The government also will pay the SGLI premiums on $150,000 of that coverage for service members in combat zones.

Until the SGLI increases kick in, the law provides for a special death gratuity of $150,000, retroactive to October 7, 2001, and, again, only for survivors of those who died in a combat zone or during training for combat.

So Vivianne’s benefits won’t change. She received a $12,420 death gratuity and $250,000 in SGLI. She is ineligible for the added $237,580.

Vivianne said she was reconciled to this disparity until her children began to be denied other perks intended to honor the sacrifice of families who lost loved ones to the war.

One nonprofit offers small scholarships, another gives these children a laptop computer. It’s as though her own kids didn’t lose a father fighting for his country, Vivianne said.

The final straw was learning that her daughter, Katie, was ineligible for a “comfort quilt” intended for children of Marines killed in war.

“While it is true your husband was serving in the military,” the nonprofit group told Vivianne in an e-mail, “he was not in an active war theater at the time he died. He lost his life back here at home.”

Defense officials argue there is precedence for a two-tier death benefit. Under the federal Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program, police officers, firefighters and other safety officials receive a death benefit of $275,658 if killed by traumatic injury in the line of duty. Ironically, given Vivianne’s situation, Congress in 2003 extended eligibility for that payment to police and firefighters killed by stress-related heart attacks and strokes.

“What I want to do is stick out my red flag and say, ‘Hey, don’t just look at this pathology of death. Look at his history” of service as an infantry officer, Vivianne said. On his first tour in Iraq, Wersel was the command operations center’s ground watch officer for Task Force Tarawa, for which he received the Meritorious Service Medal. His award commends the precision and clarity of his reports to commanders during the battle of An Nasiriyah.

Three days before Rich Wersel’s death, Gen. William Nyland, assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, joined other military leaders in warning Congress against establishing two levels of death benefits.

“I firmly believe that we would do great harm to our servicemen and women . . . were we to make such distinctions in one’s service,” Nyland said.

The House-passed 2006 defense authorization bill would make the two-tier benefit permanent. The Senate bill would, too, as written, but floor amendments are still possible. An aide to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said he might propose again to extend the benefit increases retroactively to all active duty deaths since Oct. 7, 2001. An identical amendment was dropped from the supplemental bill earlier this year in final negotiations with the House.

[dolanp]

So she gets a quarter of a million dollars but she's mad her kids don't get free laptops and quilts.... :scrutiny:

[Walt Sherrill]

I think the issue she's trying to address is that the pressures and strains of military duty don't end just because you've left the combat zone.

The fact that had her husband died in Iraq, doing exactly the same thing would have doubled the benefit is what has her upset. He didn't have to die in combat. He could have been hit by a truck or died of food poisoning!

While she's getting a goodly sum, it isn't the same as having a living income source. She's probably not ready to go to work, and I'll bet that her survivor benefits as a Marine wife are not what you expect.

(Anybody know what survivors get?)

She now has to worry about things like finding a home, as home allowances or on-base housing, easy access to commissary and medical services will all change. (She may still have some of these benefits, but her world is being turned upside down.) And were she the spouse of an enlisted man, I'd hate to think what would be in store.

[rock jock]

He could have been hit by a truck or died of food poisoning! So could we all. I have to agree with this new system. I think it recognizes the unique sacrifice associated with combat and training.

[thorn726]

I think the issue she's trying to address is that the pressures and strains of military duty don't end just because you've left the combat zone.

when the rest of us are getting retirement/ death packages like that, i'll feel bad. until then, i see now problem with that system. how would families of combat feel. the combat soldier deserves extra in my book- being in the zone means you are part of the op.- if you die off duty, you are still there, and were on duty in a CZ recently.
this guy- whatever man, i appreciate the service but enough is enough.
you were at home with your family.
half of the comabt benefit relates to exactly that, dying far away from family

by lady's logic, TEACHERS should get an INCREDIBLE death package.

argh this makes me mad. i cna break my back my whole life, pay taxes to no end. what will i get. $800 a month ssi. 200,000 sounds pretty good. greedy woman wants double that. ARGH

[crucible]

argh this makes me mad. i cna break my back my whole life, pay taxes to no end. what will i get. $800 a month ssi. 200,000 sounds pretty good. greedy woman wants double that. ARGH

Then enlist and risk you life serving others; make a career of it even. Then get married and have a family that must suffer even more than yourself for getting deployed like this man did.

Otherwise, keep your mouth shut, or, stay in Berkeley and bitch-they do that well there. The men and families who serve this country, to the point of death even, allow you that freedom to whine and complain-and deserve as much, no, deserve even more that your what you can get out of SSI and a life of serving yourself.

Cruc
Fmr. Cpl. of Marines

[hvengel]

Some of you need to re-read the artical. There are two differrnt programs here. The biggest one is an insurance program (SGLI). He was currently elgible for $250,000 insurance which if he was not in a combat zone he paid for in full and for which .gov paid for $150,000 in coverage for those in a combat zone. It appears that he was paying for full coverage at the time of his death since his widow will receive $250,000. When the new law kicks in he could have paid for additional coverage up to $400,000. Until that program is available .gov will through in an additional $150,000 to make it like those killed in a war zone had $400,000 in coverage. This part I agree with the widow since he was paying for the maximum amount of life insurance that he was eligible for he should get the max benefit even if .gov has to make up the difference before the new law goes into affect. After all he is actually paying more for his life insurance out of his own pocket than someone in a comabe zone yet he recieves $150,000 less. Does not seem fair to me.

The second benefit I am less inclinded to agree with the widow since this is a direct payment from .gov and is not paid for by the service member as an insurance payment.

[280PLUS]

Let's say she's 40, she lives to be 74 thats 34 years (PLUS she's got 2 kids for the next 12 years PLUS she's lost her husband and their father.) $262,420 / 34 = $7718 per year. Sheds a bit different light on it, don't it? That $250,00will be gone in less than 10 years I'd bet and not because she's living frivilously(sp?) either. :(

[dolanp]

If you want to put it into perspective ask every other widows whose husband died unexpectedly what they got?

Bet cops' wives don't get 250 Gs. Is their sacrifice worth less? He died lifting weights...

Give a mouse a cookie and they want some milk.

[hvengel]

They do if they pay for $250,000 in life insurance. That is what this guy did. It is what any of us do if we want to take care of our families if we should die. The difference is that I can purchase as much life insurance as I want or can afford. I am not limited to $250,000 by law like he was. I suspect that police officers can also get more than $250,000 in life insurance if they want to. Fact is that $250,000 in life insurance is way too little for anyone with a family and anyone who has the option to get more and has a family is not being responsible if they don't have more unless they have significant assets (like >$1,000,000) to pass on.

[thorn726]

Then enlist and risk you life serving others; make a career of it even. Then get married and have a family that must suffer even more than yourself for getting deployed like this man did.

complete BS. i am not opposed to death benefits for soldiers, or retirement.

but treating a soldier who dies at home seving on a base the same as a soldier who is in combat- that to me is an offense to the combat soldier.

man i appreciate soldeirs to no end, but there has to be a limit.

the guy had a heart attack training. seems like really he should have already been retired maybe.

[Blackhawk 6]

but treating a soldier who dies at home seving on a base the same as a soldier who is in combat- that to me is an offense to the combat soldier.

The problem is not as simple as the geographic location of the service member.

Hypothetically, who's family deserves more money:

The Marine O-6 who served his nation faithfully for 26 years, saw in action in Panama, Somalia, Desert Storm and just completed his second tour in Iraq, recipient of the Navy Cross, two Silver Stars and a host of lesser awards, who dies lifting weights in the Quantico Gym

Or...

The 18-year old Airman who just arrived in Qatar from basic training yesterday and choked to death on a chicken bone in the dining facility?

I empathize for the Widow, but as the wife of a Marine Colonel she is familiar with the system and her treatment should come as no surprise.

[Jeeper]

Am I missing something here or do regular life insurance companies not cover people in the military? People can choose whatever protection they want their family to have. If you dont buy it then I cant really feel pity.

I think that the people in a combat zone deserve higher benefits.

I dont think that the ones at home deserve less.

There is a big difference. It is a bonus for being in combat, like combat pay. That is all it is, a little extra money to pay a premium.

[Kharn]

Jeeper:
Am I missing something here or do regular life insurance companies not cover people in the military? People can choose whatever protection they want their family to have. If you dont buy it then I cant really feel pity.Private insurance never covers war, thats why the government has to offer SGLI in its place. But, I bet he could have paid for private insurance in addition to SGLI if he wanted to.

Kharn

[GT]

He served. A damn sight more than most of us.

So few servicemen die compared to the rest of us it would not exactly break the country to pay decent death benefits to all, or at least to those who die within a certain time after deployment.

You are using these people up and they and their families are at the whim of the bureaucracy.

50% of the population is sucking on the teat in one way or another and these servicemen are the ones making sure there is still a teat there when you need it.

Cut some inner city welfare benefits, some of Ted Turner's farm subsidies, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the latest corporate bailout and give the families an amount that, properly managed, could provide and additional income and/or college funds for the kids.

Drop in the bucket for a country of this size for the few who will stand up for it.


G

[Vernal45]

Military members SHOULD get the same benefits, insurance and retirement that our congress does.



Bet cops' wives don't get 250 Gs. Is their sacrifice worth less? He died lifting weights...

Cops are not military.

[1 old 0311]

Iraq is Iraq. The gym is the gym. He deserves the same as any serviceman who dies OUTSIDE A WAR ZONE.
Kevin
A 1/3 3RD Mar Div
RVN 69-70

[280PLUS]

When you visit FDR's estate they'll tell you in no uncertain terms that there is no doubt the stress of WWII killed FDR before his time. How would it be any different for this Colonel?

[striker3]

Here is a little insight for you:

Why don't you look up what areas are considered a combat zone? Some of those "zones" are not in range of any kind of comabt. Try Bahrain. If you are stationed there you are in a combat zone...except that you are living in the lap of luxury with all the convienences you could ever want. But the thing is, you could kill yourself rolling out of bed with a hangover, and still recive the extra benefits!!! :cuss:

I think the system needs to be reworked and until it is, everyone who has deployed to an active combat zone and subsequently died by causes other than their own stupidity should be entiteled to the full benefits.

[crucible]

complete BS. i am not opposed to death benefits for soldiers, or retirement.

but treating a soldier who dies at home seving on a base the same as a soldier who is in combat- that to me is an offense to the combat soldier.

man i appreciate soldeirs to no end, but there has to be a limit.

Which has exactly diddly to do with you complaining (above) about someone who's dedicated thier and their family's lives to serving this country getting more benefits at a result of thier death while serving than your SSI and a lifetime of serving you, yourself and you-and then having the gall to calling his wife greedy. (This has nothing to do with the issue the thread is about.)

the guy had a heart attack training. seems like really he should have already been retired maybe.

Huh? I had a heart attack at the grand old age of 31-only a few years out of the service and in relatively good health. It can happen to anyone, at anytime, regardless of lifestyle, age or even family history. Guess everyone should be retired then huh?

Cruc

[Jeeper]

Private insurance never covers war, thats why the government has to offer SGLI in its place. But, I bet he could have paid for private insurance in addition to SGLI if he wanted to.

Kahrn

So since he didnt die in a "War Zone" would he be covered by regular insurance or not? I have no idea about thi stuff and am just curious. I am just trying to figure out how you cover yourself for say $500K of coverage going in and out of war zones. I wasnt sure if you jsut carry your own policy that covers you once you are out the zone.

[280PLUS]

Jeeper,

As far as I know (and I'm no expert) no policy covers "acts of war".

[21H40]

SGLI has always been for servicemembers... regardless of where or how you die in service.

The whole idea behind this war without front lines is that you don't know where the combat zone is. Right now Kuwait's so safe it's embarrassing. I'm still in an official combat zone. Are you advocating "punishing" me for living long enough to make home to my wife and daughter? :cuss:

Also, this war is different than anything we've had in recent times. Even Reservists and Nat'l Guard are being told that, while their home units aren't supposed to be back within 5 years, the individual soldiers should expect to fill slots in other units every 3-4 years minimum -- unless of course they have a high demand MOS.

[280PLUS]

unless of course they have a high demand MOS. Been there, we called it "Rate".

[petrel800]

The fact here is that he was grossly underinsured if all he had was the 250,000 group policy his empoyer provided for him. A simple seach of the internet can provide various links like this:

http://www.aafmaa.com/ads/loveyourfamily/

It seems as though there are additional levels of insurance to be purchased for service men and women from private companies. In this case a normal life policy would have paid because he was not killed in combat. He should have also had protection here to. He and his wife should have had a comprihensive plan in place before they started having children. To not be prepared for the worst case scenario has now put the future of his children in danger.

This unfortunatly is becoming the norm for a lot of families. Instead of planning for the future we put more and more emphasis on the fed to bail us out, and when they don't we look for some sort of excuse to squeeze more of the tax payers money into our pockets.

Finally, I would like to thank every service man and woman who has put his or her life on the line to defend this country. Whether it be at home or abroad, in peace or during war. However, service men and women enter a contractual relationship and receive compensation for their efforts. While I have no problem with increasing death benefits or pay to make their jobs more enticing, I do have a problem with the entitlement mentality of I'm a service person and I deserve more than I agreed to when I signed up.

[21H40]

Thanks for the link... I'll admit that I've been counting on SGLI as my primary life insurance for too long, and I haven't even shopped for alternatives. :o

BTW I didn't join for entitlements or college money, but I also didn't join for Anthrax vac's. or stop loss. Newsweek a couple months ago said only 0.4% of Americans are in military service now. I imagine more people will feel that servicemembers are an undeserving minority aiming for a free lunch. :mad:

[petrel800]

BTW I didn't join for entitlements or college money, but I also didn't join for Anthrax vac's. or stop loss. Newsweek a couple months ago said only 0.4% of Americans are in military service now. I imagine more people will feel that servicemembers are an undeserving minority aiming for a free lunch.

I hope my statement hasn't made you feel that I feel that way about all service people, and let me once again express my gratitude for your service. It is a shame that military numbers are dwindling and .gov needs to make the job more enticing to young americans through better pay and benefits just like how any business increases their work force. Also, this crap about not allowing recruiters in high schools to speak with students is also bunk (I reference a story about a philly community barring recruiters, sorry no link). When I graduated high school I was proud to allow members from the Army come to my house and speak with me about the service. In the end, after considering all my options I choose a different path. My only problem is with those who sign an agreement and then after the fact want more than they agreed to. I do not feel as though people who have joined the service have done so out of entitlment or for a free lunch.

There is no more honorable profession then serving this great nation and you all do deserve to be compensated for it.

[DelayedReaction]

In a war without front lines, I have trouble with anyone having their benefits limited because of where they died. Soldiers should receive the best benefits possible, regardless of where they are.

[Cellar Dweller]

Life insurance doesn't, nor should it include "kickers" for years of service, # of deployments, # medals, officer/warrant/enlisted, MOS etc. Life insurance isn't a "be-all, end-all" nor is it supposed to be like winning the lottery.

She has at least 5 years worth of income to either remarry or get a job, and she does not have to be a "stay-at-home" mom. Unless things have grossly changed since I was in, she will also be collecting SSI until the children are 18 (or 19 in school, or 23(?) if disabled) plus she gets some SSI until the youngest is 16 (ex. I die today, my wife + 2 children get ~$2500/month; my service time was SSI-creditable income in the 80's-90's).

Don't most, if not all state universities have "children of veterans" scholarships? If not, then it's moot...

She appears to be complaining about PRIVATE, NON-PROFITs denying her and her children, not the government. They make the rules, his death doesn't fit, therefore perks are denied...very simple.

[280PLUS]

Soldiers should receive the best benefits possible, regardless of where they are. I'll second that emotion but would change "soldiers" to "military personel" ;)

[21H40]

280,
Absolutely, "service members" is really what I've seen here. My unit has been working with Navy Seabees, Marines and AirForce throughout our deployment. I've heard rumors of Coast Guard, but I haven't made it to the beach to cheack it out -- reckon the comander'd approve a request for a weekend recon at the beach to look for CG? Maybe I'll take the NTV (Non-Tatical Vehicle) and a couple of cases of near-beer, you know, just in case of emergencies! :D

As far as petrel800, I appreciate that you don't mean anything personally, but you did hit a nerve. This perpetual war is tearing up families faster than it seems to be killing insurgents (the last Army Times mentions divorce rates climbing amazingly high -- I need to start carrying my reading material into the internet cafe so I can quote them accurately :( , I'll just say real high since I don't remember #'s). I probably ought to stop here before I rant too far off topic. :cool:

Despite all that, it is fundamentally difficult for me to have sympathy for a senior officer's wife. O-6 is a level where you should be able to understand all of the word play that .gov uses around it's "benifits," and at a minimum, she shouldn't act suprised.

[wmenorr67]

It still boils down to the fact that service members in a "combat" zone get a little bit better pay with the separation allowances and hazardous duty pay. Which by the way most if not all is going to be at least tax free on the federal level. Then the government is going to pay for the 1st $150000 worth of life insurance. The cost for me on my SGLI is $16.25 a month for the current max of $250000. I also pay $9 something for $100000 on my spouse. I also have a "civilian" policy of $150000 (I think) that will not pay based on an act of war. Plus I my company provides $10000 free. My family will be taken care of until my wife decides to go to work wether I die in or out of combat.