Hi, I need help with essay on McCains Proposal to Cut Tricare for Retirees and it's Impact. Paper must be at least 750 words. Please, no plagiarized work!Download file to see previous pages... To supp

Hi, I need help with essay on McCains Proposal to Cut Tricare for Retirees and it's Impact. Paper must be at least 750 words. Please, no plagiarized work!

To support this move, leaders from the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air force testified citing the devastating effects would have. Unfortunately, these military Leaders were uninformed about the proposal to cut TRICARE for retirees and its effects. The cuts known as sequestration will have an impact of weapons modernization and force levels if the committee does not cut a deal by the deadline. According to Philpott (2011), Senator McCain stated that putting retirees under the age of sixty-five to forcefully use TRICARE standard, health insurance from civilian employers or free-for service among other options would help the department of defense save up to one hundred and eleven billion dollars in the coming decade. In McCain’s view, it would be better to remove the TRICARE deal than take an alternative that would reduce funds for equipment, essential weapon programs and training that is needed by the military. McCain’s reason for bringing up the proposal, according to a staff member was to ensure that the super committee picks an option that would not compromise the department of defense, military personnel and their families while maintaining TRICARE provisions (Philpott, 2011). However much this proposal might seem perfect, it is bound to cause more harm than good. The military personnel will not accept this proposal. ...

Cutting the TRICARE prime would make them use other options used by the civilians. This is bound to be expensive for the military retirees. The premise that restricting military retirees and their families from TRICARE prime would make them avoid spending cuts would not be cost-effective. Cuts must be spent either way. Restricting participation in TRICARE prime would not save any cost. Most military working-age retirees are not rich. Cutting them off from TRICARE prime would seriously impair their financial capacities. Another impact the proposal would have is that is has not considered retirees under the age of sixty who do not have additional health insurance, have no employment or are homeless. All military retirees should receive the same treatment from the government. Restricting TRICARE prime against working-age retirees will be a form of discrimination. They choose to get into the military to protect the country. However, they do not choose to retire early. It is because of medical and disabling conditions that arise from work related issues that make force them to retire. Unlike retires over the age of 65, the working-age military retirees retire while young and may not get other employments because of their medical and or disabling conditions. Therefore, this proposal would discriminate on retires based on age. The fact that working age military retirees make up almost half of the percentage of TRICARE eligible population does not make it right for them to be used as sacrificial lamps in order to save cuts. This would be problematic because there is no justification as to why they should be restricted together with their families.