Lt. Cmdr. Jack Townsend, a Navy Reserve retiree in Richmond, Va., first became aware a decade ago that he wasn’t considered a military veteran under federal law. It’s been bothering him ever since.
Townsend was applying for a job when asked for a copy of his DD Form 214, “Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,” to prove veteran status. Townsend, who had earned his reserve commission through the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy, didn’t have a DD 214 because he never had served under active duty orders.
He did have his Navy Reserve retirement letter to verify 24 years of service. But employers are schooled to ask for the DD 214, proof from a job seeker of veteran status for completing a period of active duty service. “It put me in a bad light,” Townsend said.
Townsend said it is illogical that the law denies Reserve retirees veteran status but they can draw military retirement at age 60, get military health care and shop on base. The Department of Veterans Affairs even finds them eligible for certain benefits including VA guaranteed home loans.
Never miss a local story.
“The only thing I’m lacking,” said Townsend, “is the paperwork. ”
After years of complaints by reserve component retirees, a change to their veteran status may be near.
The Military Coalition, an umbrella organization for 34 military associations and veterans groups, is restarting a lobbying campaign for the new Congress and will push for passage of a bill to alter the definition of “veteran” for more than 200,000 Reserve and National Guard retirees.
The Honor America’s Guard-Reserve Retirees Act will be re-introduced this month in the House by Reps. Tim Walz, D-Minn., and Jon Runyan, R-N.J., of the House Veterans Affairs Committee. Co-sponsors in the Senate will be Republican John Boozman and Democrat Mark Pryor, a bipartisan team from Arkansas, at least on this issue.
The House has passed this legislation twice. It died each time in the Senate on opposition from North Carolina’s Richard Burr, ranking Republican on the Veterans Affairs Committee.
Burr’s staff could not be reached to comment. But advocates say the senator is worried that extending veterans status to reserve component retirees would open the door to more benefits. Proponents say the bill specifically states that those to be honored as veterans in the bill “shall not be entitled to any benefit by reason” of it.
So there is no “nose under the tent” benefit issue that should worry Burr, say coalition representatives leading the fight for the bill. These “veterans,” for example, would still not enjoy preference points in competing for federal jobs.
The Congressional Budget Office is convinced, scoring the bill as “cost neutral.” Yet the coalition is working with sponsors to add phrasing that would allay any remaining concerns Burr might have.
“To call yourself a veteran is one of the highest honors you can have after you leave the military. It’s an acknowledgement of one’s service,” said Anthony Wallis, with the Association of the United States Navy.
Most of the retirees targeted by the bill served in an era when it was commonplace to complete Reserve and Guard careers without active service. That’s almost unfathomable today given Guard and Reserve operations since 9/11.
“The population we are fighting for in this legislation is diminishing over time,” said Bob Norton, deputy director of government relations for Military Officers Association of America. “These are mostly Cold War-era folks, people who served in Reserve and Guard units but before first Gulf War, and were never called up during their careers. ”
But Norton noted that there still are reserve component careerists serving today, including National Guard technicians, who prepare others for callup but are not mobilized themselves for overseas contingencies or national emergencies. So these members, too, would be honored as veterans if they reach Guard or Reserve retirement for serving at least 20 years.
Another reason Burr should not fear a benefit expansion, Norton said, is that every benefit provided to veterans is governed by its own restrictive language specifying who is eligible. None simply goes to “any veteran.”
The bill being drafted would extend veteran status only to reserve component retirees, not to many more thousands of Reserve and Guard personnel who left before earning retirement.
Some members of the coalition may see the issue differently, Norton said, but at MOAA “our feeling is that this honor really should be reserved for those who have completed a full career.”
Write Military Update, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville, VA 20120, or email firstname.lastname@example.org. Twitter: @Military_Update.