Once again OREGON displays their disdain towards their disabled veterans.
The State of Oregon continuing further their efforts to deprive, by “breaking down” the rights of veterans of their earned VA disability benefits. The State of Oregon went so far to indicate, their official formal directive declaration on www. oregon.gov website, “Breaking down service-connected compensation… ” Stating, “…if the veteran is divorced and has dependent children, the benefits also can be apportioned to the dependents either by act of the veteran or request of the dependents. Below are the regulations for apportionment under 38 CFR.”
They make their point by referencing specifically Federal law 38 CFR3.450, “Pensions, compensation, and dependency and indemnity compensation” Setting the tone in order to bolster an illegal judicial standard for state court judgments. Oregon government policy inaccurately and publicly displayed once again their arrogance towards disabled veterans.
38 CFR 3.450, has absolutely nothing, what-so-ever, to do with a divorce as the poorly thought oregon.gov directive suggests. Due to Oregon’s stance of not protecting the rights of disabled veterans, it can only be concluded as intentional in their attempt to slip it by. Do they care? Apparently not! 38 CFR 3.450 provides that the VA administrator, in the event a veteran is hospitalized and incapacitated unable to handle or make decisions about personal finances, matters concerning the veteran’s compensation and dependency and indemnity compensation these personal matters may be “apportioned,” not by any court, but “as prescribed by the Secretary” to a “spouse” and dependents. Since there is no divorce there is no enforcement, … only administration.
This is just another continuing State of Oregon attempt in attacking disabled veterans’ benefits. This, in order to pollute, “breaking down” and misleading the public by referencing “..if the veteran is divorced… the benefits can also be apportioned.” If they took the time to read 38 CFR 3.450, and study carefully about what they pronounce as an official legal directive, they would have discovered 38 CFR 3.450 the term “spouse” is mentioned 14 times.
A public “in your face” display of Oregon’s disdain of disabled veterans and their on going failure to protect VA benefits as I had previously indicated, by violating both Federal, and Oregon laws, purposely legislated specifically to protect these benefits, should you like to be reminded.
As a veterans advocate, and a Korean era veteran, I am neither disabled or in any divorce action. A veteran’s view of the reality of law passed down by state courts treatment towards their own disabled veterans‘.
William Heino Sr.
http://www.oregon.gov/odva/pages/apportionment.aspx
This comment has been hidden due to low approval.