Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) & Oklahoma SB 1951
Oklahoma SB 1951 introduced February 6, 2012, is already amended (February 27, 2012), specifically stating that hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay, and combat pay will be included for computations for alimony or child support.
This is an improvement in the bill.
OK SB1951 CRSC Recommendations at a Glance
- Add CRSC pay to page two lines 12 through 14.
- Remove the definition of CRSRC
- Remove all references to CRSC property awards (add the issue to SB1887)
- Discuss the wording for CRSC in SB 1887
1: Add CRSC to Support Computations
CRSC pay should be included (added to the wording) for computation of alimony and child support.
The reasoning is a reference from Military.com FAQ on CRSC:
“Are CRSC payments subject to garnishment?
Yes, CRSC entitlements are subject to garnishment action for alimony and child support.”
2 & 3: CRSC Definition and Property Division Proposals
The amended SB1951 also changed wording concerning alimony computation:
In no event shall an award of alimony payments, whether designated for support or for property division, be based on CRSC as defined in paragraph 1 of subsection H of Section 118B of this title.
My immediate reaction is similar to my previous post concerning Oklahoma SB 1951 mixing support and property. I would suggest discussing all property issues in SB1887 and thus, an immediate amendment to read:
In no event shall an award of alimony payments, whether designated for support or for property division, be based on CRSC as defined in paragraph 1 of subsection H of Section 118B of this title.
Then, I would suggest further discussion concerning alimony and child support since CRSC can be garnished (as mentioned above).
Removing the definitions of CRSC from all areas of the bill is advisable since federal rules defining CRSC eligibility have already changed three times per a DOD Memo and the goal should be, whatever decision is made concerning CRSC — let’s have it apply to everyone from this point forward.
4: CRSC and Military Divorce
All discussion of CRSC as property belongs in Oklahoma Senate Bill 1887.
What remains to be addressed is: will Oklahoma try to prevent division of Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) as property?
CRSC may be divided. according to Military.com FAQ on CRSC:
“Are CRSC payments subject to a court-ordered division of pay that is payable to a former spouse?
CRSC is considered special compensation and therefore not subject to the rules and regulations governing military retired pay, including court-ordered division of pay. However, if the former spouse returns to court and obtains a new order, the CRSC may be divided.”
Read the U.S. Code on CRSC.
You can follow the amended versions of SB 1951. (Click on the tab that says versions.)
I’m all in favor of ex-spouses getting a share of the disabled military member’s VA and CRSC disability pay – with ONE caveat – the ex-spouse must first check into a hospital and undergo surgery that will result in their having the same disability as the military member. Kind of biblical when you look at it that way “an eye for an eye…”
It never ceases to amaze me, that so many spouses go after the service members with claws, thinking that as a spouse they have gone through combat as did the troop receiving CRSC. The author is just another bitter ex-spouse, and is only concerned with sticking it to the soldier.
The writers in this forum can agree on many issues of “pain” associated with military service, and the often pathetic and inconsistent care delivered by the VA. And the costs of going to war, the inherent basis for CRSC, is something the spouse’s angst can in no way be considered “equal.”
Is some basis for support, i.e., alimony, child support proper? Yes, I believe so, but that’s not the same thing as dividing CRSC to pay for it. If the service member cannot manage on their current retirment and CRSC, then the spouse should not take from the one who earned it. If there are other funds, other properties involved, that’s another issue entirely, but for the author to make a claim upon it is specious, mean-spirited, and just plain greedy.
Oklahoma legislators should be ashamed of themselves, oh wait, most of them are family lawyers. They are not legislating for the total population of the state, but for the former spouse. They know how to read the federal statues on CRSC. What is truly sad is that they always try to make the military member pay their fees as well as paying the former spouse a fee for being married. anyone ever heard of a lawyer that says that the USFSPA is unconstitutional? No? that is because it is a cash cow for the lawyer and the former spouse. I bet that Clara Harris down in Texas would have gotten the SBP, even though she killed her husband (ran him over repeatedly, with his daughter from his prior marriage in the car begging her not to hurt her dad). She did go to prison, but guess what, yep, she retained custody of her twin sons, while in jail for murdering their father. So why would any veteran soldier, sailor, marine, or airman ever expect that state legislatures go after combat related special compensation? Hope the legislators protect CRSC and not make it available to former spouses. Federal law says states cannot. Federal Law also states clearly that Veteran’s disability benefits cannot be divided either. But does anyone see Attorney General Eric Holder or the Justice department filing lawsuits against states or state judges that do? No, they are not. Seems they only want to go after immigration issues. Something some states are attempting to get a handle on, but the federal justice system will sue them in a heartbeat to protect an illegal alien, but not a veteran that is/was disabled in the course of upholding democracy. Oh, by the way, the prior administration, President George Bush, he did not do anything either………..
How is paying an ex spouse for life divorce?????
Well, not to sound like a jerk, but its simple.
She divorces you but not your benefits. Somehow this still manages to be community property. Forever. Even after YOU die in some cases(SBP).
Ive heard a thousand soldiers in Fallujah say they wish they were home. Havent heard one spouse say they wish they were in Fallujah. But i guess they serve along side us…..
But this nasty cycle is designed to never end. You see, by subsidizing divorce and taxing fatherhood, politicians will have a never ending “pool” of voters to shower with YOUR wealth. Now they even shower them with YOUR hazardous duty “benefits” Which are really incentives, you know to hopefully coax you over the bunker; remove the incentive, remove the will to do hazardous duty, thusly destroy the military from with in. Yay hippies!…… If it wasnt real it would sound like a joke.
Thats the new definition of divorce.
TO: FORMER MILITARY SPOUSE and OK State
Lets be clear on what disability is before we “look into” whether or not anyone cares if it effects a former spouse in ANY WAY.
FACT 1: Obviously someone who lost a hand will view most of that disability pay as an offset to lost earning potential, if it affects their future employment potential.Duh.
FACT 2: By in large VA health care sucks. There i said it. Its free but it looks and feels free also. Having said that; This money is there for SMs to budget to offset the cost living expensings, so the SM isnt tethored to a VA facility in perpituity. We dont want to be tethored to welfare. My point, if i need to move where the “work” is, and theres no VA facility, its my resposibility to budget for handicap upgrades, etc….. VA Loans and grants are fine for just getting your “foot in the door” but thats about it.
FACT 3: VA disability IS NOT workers comp. The diff between a guy installing satelite TV and a soldier is a bit diff. You see, the satelite guys when he falls and gets hurt, was doing it for income. Perhaps the soldier is as well, however the satelite guy doesnt have a “competitor” on the otherside of the house virtually garunteeing the injuries in question.
FACT 4: The fact the disability is even eqauted to the word income, suggests the some people will lose an arm to earn a buck. Its not INCOME. Period.
You must remember, the DoD is the only job that requires MORTAL COMBAT as part of its daily duty description (on your behalf none the less). No where else is this true. I doubt walmart 401ks have such an issue.
The fact that people even suggest that a SM was amputated and sterlized to “reduce” a former spouses payment is a big indicator that people who have never served in war, should not administrate its aftermath.
I lost 13 teeth and two fingers. During this time, it never occured to me i could use this as a venue to “hold out” on my ex wifes hard earned “combat” benefits.
I was worried about eating, and having enough income to be a father should i pull thru.
But hey, yeah, tell me more about worrying about spouses portion of retainer pay, and how i should go about using my body parts to reduce it. Im listening.
It shouldnt even come up. At all. The source of my disability income is a crater somewhere in Samara Iraq, not in the purview of the OK courts.
Let me ask you this, when i get divorced, why doesnt my mom get the same amount? Afterall, she went thru the same worry my ex did? Oh yeah, my exs new husband need his Harley payments covered (this was told to me in a email…followed by a LMFAO).
I guess weve selected who the real patriots are havent we……
I wonder how many sets of partials 800k of Las Vegas GSA party moneys could have bought me? Well, it doesnt matter because my healthy, college educated, 33 year old ex needs a harley for her new baby.
Joe
(9 Combat rotations {and counting},13 teeth, 2 fingers, and 2 wives….apparently one harley)
We need to remember to update our military vernacular.
Because sacrifice is tied to the value of future labor or goods and benefits, like a chess pawn. In this case we can clearly see there is NO VALUE assigned to the fighting soldier in anyway. So we are NOT in fact sacrificing.
We are just being thrown away, like the arms and legs that have been amputated,oops, i meant calculated into this bill.
Congress should have placed the burden of unecessary “additional protection” for military officer spouses on the backs of all taxpayers by creating a Military Spouse Welfare program instead of placing the burden on the backs of mostly enlisted service members like the USSC suggested. Unconstitutional USFSPA payments to former military spouses is a transfer payment, not a payment for services received. It can only be “earned” by the service member that is under contract to give their lives to their country if necessary. What other part of our society is required to pay a remarried former spouse for LIFE a portion of their property earned AFTER the divorce is final? Teach your children well, “If you join the military, DON’T get married until AFTER you transfer to the permanent reserve list.”
This is just shameful. Is it not bad enough that soldiers and veterans get injured in the field and people really believe that it belongs to the former spouse. Dividing veterans’ disability or any disability payment is like declaring an able person disabled as well by virtue of such invasion, compounded by reducing the amount of compensation one receives. I suggest to you that Congress has left this door open to entertain themselves and laugh at the bickering amongst the service members. Congress did not for see any benefits to spouses and neither former spouses. The attorneys are in for the money. They do not care about anyone but themselves. Do you really think the courts are fair? You asked it, the judges are attorneys who represent their professional. the BAR does not represent any fairness in the profession, nor any ethics, as example by the Willick Law Group in Las Vegas, NV who charges former spouses a contingency fee for his services. Mind you this is against professional and ethical conduct of the BAR, so they allow him to practices. If this is not bad enough, a family law practice with an attorney convicted of child sexual abuse still working in the office. How ethical is this? I deeply understand the plight of some former spouses because it was required by senior officers in command environments. For enlisted who were sent to battle and wounded, their scars and hardships belong only to them. The history behind benefits to disabled veterans is not a new concept, but one which grew out of gratitude of a grateful nation. The language originates even before the First COngress in 1789. I suggest to you that Congress owes any former military spouse a full extension of gratitude for your service for being part of the American dream. For such as part of this extension must comply with all the residuals of war, to include divorce, since it represents such ironies of war. Taking away from the disabled will never make anyone whole.
HOW IS THIS FOR GETTING STABBED IN THE BACK!!
Here is one of the Oklahoma Open Records Act emails (FOIA)detailing OBA and ABA divorce attorneys colluding with legislators….Shameful plundering of veterans
Onigina1 Message—–
//////
***EMAIL MESSAGE in this post HAS BEEN REMOVED by MODERATOR on 3/15/2012**
REASON:
1) OFF TOPIC: The email message originally posted had no mention of OK Senate Bill 1951 or CRSC
2) Posting of private emails in comments must be done by either the verified sender or receiver. (Note: In the interest of educating on topics, readers making comments are permitted to LINK to urls of publicly posted emails.)
//////
This is the most rediculous bill I have ever seen! NOW, in addition to a military retiree losing half of his or her retainer pay to a former spouse now they are supposed to give them part of their VA Disability compensation, in addition to CRSC?
Don’t the ambulance chasers in the Oklahoma Legislature have anything better to do than to act as accessories to the RAPE of Oklahoma’s servicemen and veterans? Can this bill be made a part of the Annual Oklahoma Legislature’s Military Appriciation Day?
Here’s a suggested addition to the bill. Since VA disability pay and CRSC are paid to the disabled veteran as conpensation for injuries incurred as a result of military service and combat, its only fair that if the ex-spouse receives a portion of the disability compensation that they have the SAME disability. Thus, the ex-spouse of a disabled amputee must have the same limb(s) amputated before receiving payment. I know a couple of wheelchair bound veterans who would gladly pay to have their ex-spouse disfigured as they are….
Hi Michael,
Oklahoma SB1951 is called the Wounded Warrior Protection Act and the language appears to EXCLUDE CRSC from alimony, child support, and division of pay. (See the direct link to SB 1951 and click the ‘variations tab’ for the current amendment.)
There are many viewpoints concerning service member’s disability, mostly surrounding whether it occurred before or after divorce and ensuring it is not used as a venue to reduce a former military spouse award. Some of these positions are discussed in Military Divorce Tips.
There is much confusion surrounding CRSC which is why more discussion is needed to ensure the representatives have all the facts before passing the bill.
The final nail has been take off and the building will fall. It is appalling that the needs of the unwilling will be given more credence than the people who fought for this country. There can be no mistake this is the back stage work of a scoundrel attorney in Las vegas. The man that hate service members and who poachers the military for his own personal financial gains. He calls himself a christian man who looks out for former military spouses, but uses their woes to line his pockets. This attorney charges his divorce fee on a contingence basis like an an car accident victim. He is no different than an ambulance chaser who takes advantages of people. OK is not OK. This bill is a slap on the face for every American soldiers who engaged the enemy and has the scars. Now, his scars will be subject to property settlement. This is bad news for the security of our nation. Whoever was part of this bill should be ashamed and be disgrace and thrown out of office. Every single traitor of American freedom.