June/July 2002 - Philippine Defenders Main

New CHAMPVA Regulations
Published in Federal Register
WASHINGTON — Regulations that
bring several improvements to the
Civilian Health and Medical Program of
the Department of Veterans Affairs
(CHAMPVA) were published in the
Federal Register recently.
“I am very happy VA can provide improved
financial protection for families of
disabled veterans against the effect of an
injury or long-term illness,” said Secretary
of Veterans Affairs Anthony J. Principi.
The new rules will bring financial relief
to CHAMPVA beneficiaries and extend
benefits to older survivors and dependents
of some disabled or deceased veterans
who face medical expenses not paid
by Medicare or other third-party payers.
One improvement, called “CHAMPVA
for Life,” actually began in October. It is
designed favor spouses or dependents who
are 65 or older. They must be family members
of veterans who have a permanent
and total service-connected disability, who
died of a service-connected condition or
who were totally disabled from a serviceconnected
condition at the time of death.
They also must have Medicare coverage.
“CHAMPVA for Life” began paying benefits
for covered medical services four
months ago to eligible beneficiaries who are
65 or older and enrolled in Medicare Parts
A & B. “CHAMPVA for Life” benefits are
payable after payment by Medicare or other
third-party payers. For services not covered
by Medicare or other insurance, such as
outpatient prescription medications,
CHAMPVA will be the primary payer.
CHAMPVA beneficiaries who reached
age 65 as of June 5, 2001, but were not
enrolled in Medicare Part B on that date,
will be eligible for this expanded benefit
even though not enrolled in Medicare Part
B. There is no change in CHAMPVA coverage
for those beneficiaries 65 and older
who do not qualify for Medicare.
In addition, the regulation will reduce
the catastrophic cap, or amount of out-ofpocket
expenses for CHAMPVA beneficiaries.
Under the new rule, CHAMPVA will
pay 100 percent of allowable medical
expenses after a beneficiary reaches
$3,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, a reduction
from $7,500.
People can request an application by
writing to the VA Health Administration
Center (HAC), P.O. Box 469028, Denver,
CO 80246-9028.
To be eligible for CHAMPVA, people
must be family members of veterans who
have a permanent and total service-connected
disability, who died of a serviceconnected
condition or who were totally
disabled from a service-connected condition
at the time of death.
Updates about CHAMPVA are posted
on VA’s Health Administration Center
Web site at www.va.gov/hac.
————————
18 — THE QUAN
QUAN Origin
Dear Joe:
I read the letter from CWO Stephen
Watson in the April 2002 issue of QUAN
in which he mentioned the confusing word
QUAN. I was born and raised in Manila,
where the predominant dialect is Tagalog.
I might be able to throw some light on the
subject.
First of all, many years ago at a national
ADBC convention, I was in a group of
ex-POWs who spent time at O’Donnell
and/or Cabanatuan and we were discussing
the word QUAN. they felt that the
word originated at the mess hall where
the cooks were concocting a conglomerate
of items in one big pot. It contained rice,
“camote” (sweet yams), mongo beans,
“kangkong” (a green leafy vegetable), and
all kinds of items thrown in.They did not
know what to call it. So they called it
QUAN, as derived from the Tagalog word
“Kwan”. Apparently, they heard it from a
Filipino who mentioned the word casually.
This word must have been the idea originated
by the editor or publisher of the
ADBC magazine when it started. That
was a close interpretation of the word
QUAN.
Another version is the one give to me by
my wife Marge, from Montana, who also
lived in California for many years before
we met and got married. She said that if
one wanted to use a word without any
description, he would say, “Give me that
gizmo,” or “whatyoumacallit.” This is the
closest version to the Tagalog word
“Kwan.” In Tagalog, if we want to say
something and don’t know the word, we
just say, “Yung ban kwan,” or “That
gizmo.” I hope that this will satisfy Mr.
Watson or any reader of our magazine.
Sincerely,
Mariano “Mario” Villarin
————————
Support the Nimitz Museum
Dear Mr. Vater,
In the Nov. 2001 issue of The QUAN,
there was a letter from Larry L. Pangan,
discussing the valiant effort made by the
troops in the Philippines after Pearl
Harbor. There are not many people who
realize the significance of holding off the
Japs for four months on Bataan and
another month on Corregidor. Without
this gallant effort, Australia would
undoubtedly have fallen, and WW2 would
have been a different story. Larry’s letter
does an excellent job of outlining the
whole situation.
Very little notice is made of the decision
of Maj. Gen. Edward P. King Jr. (my stepfather)
to DISOBEY MacArthur’s order to
fight to the last man. Ned realized that
the sacrifice of some 75,000 men would
accomplish nothing militarily, so cut off
communications with Gen. Wainwright, so
that he wouldn’t have to share in the decision
to surrender. MacArthur never spoke
to Gen. King again because of the surrender.
It is interesting to note that Pres.
Truman fired MacArthur “for disobeying a
direct order.”
If indeed Gen. King had “fought to the
last man” as ordered, Gen. Wainwright
could never have surrendered on Corregidor
— there would have been no
Bataan Death March, Camp O’Donnell,
Cabanatuan, Hell Ships, slave labor, etc.
He made the right decision as you survivors
are here to tell about it.
I have just returned from a visit to The
Nimitz Museum. My WW2 outfit, the 11th
Armored Div., of Patton’s Third Army, had
a regional meeting there. I know that you
will be going there in May for your annual
gathering, and encourage you to continue
supporting this museum with your historical
documents.
Yours truly,
Barrington K. Beutell
————————
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
April 9, 2002
Mr. Earl Szwabo
1445 Keeven Lane
Florissant, Missouri 63031
Dear Mr. Szwabo:
Thank you for writing to express your
support for allowing military retirees with
compensable disabilities to receive their
full military retiree pay and full compensation
for service-related disabilities.
Please accept my apology for the delay in
responding.
I have given a good deal of thought to
the issue of concurrent receipt. The idea
that military retirees, alone among the
various groups of Federal retirees, should
forego their Department of Veterans
Affairs compensation, makes little sense.
Accordingly, I am a cosponsor of Rep.
Bilirakis’ legislation (H.R. 303), which
would amend current law to allow concurrent
receipt of both military retiree pay
and disability compensation.
How to fund concurrent receipt has
always been the main issue. My hope was
that with most military health care matters
resolved in the fiscal year 2001
defense bill, and given the House and
Senate Armed Services Committee’s support
for the program, that the President
will include funding for concurrent receipt
in his soon-to-be-released fiscal year 2003
budget request. That proved not to be the
case. I will support its inclusion in the
defense bill this year.
If you have any additional thoughts or
concerns about this or any other topic,
please do not hesitate to write or call.
Sincerely,
W. Todd Akin
Member of Congress
————————