WV Introduces Disabled Veterans’ Bill Email This Story Print This Story

West Virginia Legislators Introduce Disabled Veterans’ Benefits Protection Bill


March 9, 2008


State Representatives; Stan Shaver, Scott Varner, Randy Swartzmiller, and Robert D. Beach are all members of the West Virginia Legislature. And all four of these West Virginia politicians are sponsors of House Bill 2546, legislation designed to protect veteran’s disability compensation from any consideration as a third party award in state divorce courts. H.B. 2546 was introduced January 9, 2008 and referred to the Committee on Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security and Finance.

H.R. 2546 reinforces existing federal legislation USC, Title 38, Veteran’s Benefits, §5301(a). This federal statute was written by Congress to protect veteran’s benefits from third party awards under any legal process whatsoever. However, in spite of the strong wording of 5301, many state divorce courts nationwide routinely violate Title 38, by awarding alimony or spousal support based solely on a disabled veteran’s disability compensation. The passage of H.R. 2546 would put an end to this questionable practice in the Great State of West Virginia.

Operation Firing For Effect is requesting all West Virginia residents contact their representatives and urge them to support and pass H.B. 2546. You will find contact information for all West Virginia legislators at this link;

http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Contact/capmail.cfm

Or contact the House Clerk; Gregory M. Gray, Room 212M, Bldg. 1, State Capitol Complex, (304) 340-3200. Tell Mr. Gray that Operation Firing For Effect asked you to call in support of H.B. 2546.

Operation Firing For Effect commends State Representatives Shaver, Varner, Swartzmiller, and Beach for their actions to improve and protect the disability benefits earned by our men and women in uniform.

In an effort to avoid any confusion or misunderstanding concerning H.B. 2546, below you will find the legislation text in its entirety.


H. B. 2546

(By Delegates Shaver, Varner, Swartzmiller and Beach)

[Introduced January 9, 2008; referred to the Committee on Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security then Finance.]

A BILL to amend and reenact §48-5-510 of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended; to amend and reenact §48-7-101; to amend and reenact §48-8-103; and to amend and reenact §48-8-105, all relating to excluding disability income received by a veteran from the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs for service related injuries from any calculation used to determine spousal support.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:

That section §48-5-510 of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended and reenacted; that §48-7-101 be amended and reenacted; that §48-8-103 be amended and reenacted; and that §48-8-105 be amended and reenacted, all to read as follows:

ARTICLE 5. DIVORCE.

§48-5-510. Consideration of financial factors in ordering temporary relief.

(a) In ordering temporary relief under the provisions of this Part 5, the court shall consider the financial needs of the parties, the present income of each party from any source, their income-earning abilities and the respective legal obligations of each party to support himself or herself and to support any other persons. Provided, That disability income received by a veteran from the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs for service related injuries is not income for purposes of this article.

(b) Except in extraordinary cases supported by specific findings set forth in the order granting relief, payments of temporary spousal support and temporary child support are to be made from a party's income and not from the corpus of a party's separate estate, and an award of such relief shall not be disproportionate to a party's ability to pay as disclosed by the evidence before the court: Provided, That child support shall be established in accordance with the child support guidelines set forth in article thirteen of this chapter. Provided, however, That the corpus of the estate of a veteran receiving disability income for service related injuries cannot be used as a means of replacing the value of the disability income.

ARTICLE 7. EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY.

PART 1. MARITAL PROPERTY DISPOSITION.

§48-7-101. Equal division of marital property.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, upon every judgment of annulment, divorce or separation, the court shall divide the marital property of the parties equally between the parties.

(b) Nothwithstanding any other provision of this code to the contrary, disability income received by a veteran from the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs for service related injuries shall not be considered as property for the purposes of this article.

ARTICLE 8. SPOUSAL SUPPORT.

§48-8-103. Payment of spousal support.

(a) Upon ordering a divorce or granting a decree of separate maintenance, the court may require either party to pay spousal support in the form of periodic installments, or a lump sum, or both, for the maintenance of the other party. Payments of spousal support are to be ordinarily made from a party's income, but when the income is not sufficient to adequately provide for those payments, the court may, upon specific findings set forth in the order, order the party required to make those payments to make them from the corpus of his or her separate estate. An award of spousal support shall not be disproportionate to a party's ability to pay as disclosed by the evidence before the court. Provided, That disability income received by a veteran from the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs for service related injuries is not income for purposes of this article. Nor can the corpus of the estate of a veteran receiving disability income for service related injuries cannot be used as a means of replacing the value of the disability income.

(b) At any time after the entry of an order pursuant to the provisions of this article, the court may, upon motion of either party, revise or alter the order concerning the maintenance of the parties, or either of them, and make a new order concerning the same, issuing it forthwith, as the altered circumstances or needs of the parties may render necessary to meet the ends of justice.

§48-8-105. Rehabilitative spousal support.

(a) The court may award rehabilitative spousal support for a limited period of time to allow the recipient spouse, through reasonable efforts, to become gainfully employed. When awarding rehabilitative spousal support, the court shall make specific findings of fact to explain the basis for the award, giving due consideration to the factors set forth in section 8-103 one hundred three of this article: Provided, That disability income received by a veteran from the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs for service related injuries shall not be considered as income nor for purposes of this article. Nor can the corpus of the estate of a veteran receiving disability income for service related injuries be used as a means of replacing the value of the disability income. (b) An award of rehabilitative spousal support is appropriate when the dependent spouse evidences a potential for self-support that could be developed through rehabilitation, training or academic study.
(b)(c) The court may modify an award of rehabilitative spousal support if a substantial change in the circumstances under which rehabilitative spousal support was granted warrants terminating, extending or modifying the award or replacing it with an award of permanent spousal support. In determining whether a substantial change of circumstances exists which would warrant a modification of a rehabilitative spousal support award, the court may consider a reassessment of the dependent spouse's potential work skills and the availability of a relevant job market, the dependent spouse's age, health and skills, the dependent spouse's ability or inability to meet the terms of the rehabilitative plan and other relevant factors as provided for in section 8-103 one hundred three of this article.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to exclude disability income received by a veteran from the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs for service related injuries from any calculation used to determine spousal support.

Strike-throughs indicate language that would be stricken from the present law, and underscoring indicates new language that would be added.

http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2008_SESSIONS/RS/Bills/hb2546%20intr.htm

To review TITLE 38, U.S. Code, Veterans Benefits, §5301(a) in its entirety, visit;

http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=Title%2038,%205301%20(a)&url=/uscode/html/uscode38/usc_sec_38_00005301----000-.html

Article Opinions

William H. Heino Sr. wrote:

Thank you West Virginia! It's about time a few good legislators, looked at the problem, and the law, and said, the law is clear. VA disability belongs to the veteran and nobody else. Hopefully, all veterans across this great land will be protected.
Posted on 03/10/08 16:22:53

Jim Dotson wrote:

Thank you West Virginia, for having the courage to stand up for Disabled Veterans, I hope other leaders in other States find the courage and follow your example. It shows that west Virginia has true Leaders in their State, and all citizens should be proud to be blessed with this type of Leadership. They prove not only in words but also in actions, their appreciation to Veterans, I proudly salute your actions and courage.
Posted on 03/10/08 17:21:37

Dorrance Green wrote:

Thank you West Virginia, I live in Colorado and have been fighting this problem for eight years.
Posted on 03/10/08 17:22:54

RICK THIEL, SFC, USA, Retired wrote:

I personally want to commend you for taking the unpopular stand to defend the “military veteran”. You have given us hope that this injustice that has been taking place in local state courts for over twenty-seven (27) years now may finally be stopped and “military veterans” will finally have “equal justice for all” It is a shame that almost everyone of us has had to file appeals to try to get this madness reversed and even then only a few have won “equal justice”. I’ve been fighting for over twelve (12) years now.

The Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act and Federal case law prohibit any distribution of veterans’ disability benefits to a former spouse. 10 USC § s.1408 (a)(4)(B); 10 USC § s. 1408(c)(1); Mansell v. Mansell 490 US § 581(1989).

Undeserving spouses (both male and female) are taking advantage of an interpretation to financially benefit them for just being married to a military person and divorcing them for frivolous reasons, many times, just because the military member became disabled. The courts do not take into consideration that the non military spouse has been unfaithful, committed adultery, committed credit card abuse, committed financial abuse, committed child abuse, etc. There is record of some former spouses who divorced the military spouse before he/she was retired and/or disabled, finding out he/she retired and/or became disabled, then brought them back to court to claim the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA) award (state courts “cash cow”).

The local judges in most all the states and namely here in Hillsborough County, Florida DO NOT adhere to Federal Regulations or Federal Codes as they totally ignore USC Title 10 section 1408 and USC Title 38 section 5301. Despite my being 100% service connected for disabilities and that my “disability compensation” is protected from unauthorized seizure; by the USC Federal Codes, it makes no difference to the local judges. THANK YOU.
Posted on 03/10/08 19:38:00

William McLean wrote:

Thank you West Virginia for trying to protect the protector's. I am very grateful for your actions, and hope that the rest of the country will follow your lead and allow all veteran's to keep what we've earned with our blood.
Posted on 03/10/08 21:24:45

James T. North, MSgt, U.S. Marines,Ret. wrote:

Thank You West Virginia Lawmakers.

America, If you cannot or do not wish to join ranks in this current WAR, then "Support Our Troops" by writing your elected officials and let them know that the troops have been taken up the slack for decades, for the rest of the population and priority should be made to ensure diminished and eliminated benefits are restored.

Additionally, tell your lawmakers that you want them to ensure all benefits for our troops are supported now and in the future. Anything less is un-American! "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers and patriotic computer screensavers have been nothing more than an empty gesture until these West Virginia lawmakers decided to do what is right.
Posted on 03/11/08 14:02:56

Calvin Murphy wrote:

Thank You so much West Virginia for making a stand in the name of the American Veteran. It is about time somebody stands up and says this is WRONG. I salute you. GOD BLESS AMERICA AND THE SOLDIERS THA PROTECT IT.
Calvin Murphy-Mich
Viet Nam 66-67
Posted on 03/11/08 17:14:59

Dale L Van Luven Sr. wrote:

Thank you West Virginia for Introducing a Bill that would STOP Local Judges from openly handing out V A Disability to ex-wifes. I have been saddled with a Court Order of $1,000.00 a month for the last 5 years and for the next 5 years. In The mean time my ex forgot (?) to mention $56,000,000.00 (what you see is 56 MILLION) she had
Posted on 03/12/08 12:06:23

skylar wrote:

cool
Posted on 03/17/08 11:22:58

gordon Sutton wrote:

any one who would not support this would walk on the wounded to leave the dead behind. as most of our congress people do for more money.
Posted on 03/18/08 18:59:56

Jerry G. Bohr wrote:

Thank you West Virginia for standing up and doing the right thing in which the law was passed for. It is Time that the courts realized not only in spousal support ,but child support as well. Do fathers of children who receive disability have any thing they want to leave there kids? The courts in Iowa have said that they to can override the law..how? Thanks again for your support West Virginia. You have strong leadership who are willing to make a stand.
Posted on 03/27/08 14:53:18

george rogers wrote:

thanks west(bygod)virginia for your support of your disabled vets.I am 100% service connected vet.living in louisiana,and would go to jail before paying my ex.any of my disability pay.
Posted on 04/20/08 19:19:22

Shelley Murphy wrote:

5301CLUB-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Posted on 08/04/08 18:00:19

DONNA WRIGHT wrote:

HAVE ANY OF YOU CONSIDERED THAT THE DIVORCE MAY OCCUR BECAUSE THE WIFE WAS A VICTIM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, WAS DISABLED HERSELF, AND OLDER THAN THE VET AND UNABLE TO WORK. SHE WOULD NOT HAVE DIVORCED IF SHE HAD NOT BEEN ABUSED. DON'T YOU THINK SHE IS ENTITLED TO SOMETHING OR SHOULD SHE STAY IN AN ABUSIVE SITUATION JUST SO SHE CAN HAVE A ROOF OVER HER HEAD?
Posted on 09/08/08 08:22:11

Debbie Grammer wrote:

Thank You West Virginia. Other states need to stand by this law. Afterall, these fine vets fought for OUR freedom and are still fighting.
Remember always thank a VET.
I do!! I am also married to one>
Posted on 10/24/08 00:58:53

Russ Owen wrote:

Donna, you're talking about different situations. I'm sure a well seasoned lawyer could find a loop hole to ensure a victim of abuse received their just share. But I agree with this law. I have seen far too many Vets loss every thing to a money grubbing spouse (Man or Woman). Surely you’re not saying that every marriage ends because of domestic violence. My first marriage ended while I was overseas. I never laid a hand on my ex-wife, but she sure laid her hands on a lot of other men. Under the circumstances that you’re talking about I would agree that the victim is entitled to some form of assistance. Do you feel that my ex-wife is entitled to any part of my disability for her adulterous acts?
Posted on 11/25/08 14:31:28

Alan Cote wrote:

I am in the same situation. Family Court in Vermont awarded my adulterous ex $2K/mo in 2000 and the only source of my income is SSD and VA disability. This year she went back to court and sued for unpaid alimony (not true) and was awarded $66K + $33K interest and the court took my $150K VA purchased house and gave it to her. The judge refused to hear any of my testimony or any of my motions. It cost me $8K in attorney fees. I am now in "contempt" because I refuse to pay her or the mortgage anymore.
I am too sick to go to jail so I doubt I'll be incarcerated. The judicial system in all States need to rethink their blind judgements.
Posted on 12/18/08 10:33:34

Kurt Hafner wrote:

Thank you West Virginia. It's about time there is a state willing to support disabled veterans.
Posted on 03/27/09 07:31:57

gary rousseau wrote:

i am in the same situation i am from saginaw michigan i just got a legal separation and the the local judges here are doing the same taking aportion of my disability compensation and use it as an income to determine my ability to pay ailomony and that not right need your help has the nrw law been amended yet if so when and how can i find a copy please help
Posted on 04/08/09 22:52:01

Add Your Opinion

:

:
:





Recent Items
» Army Limits Re-Enlistment Options
» Tiger Woods Honors Troops
» ‘So Far, So Good’ in Iraq
» North Korean Missile Launch
» Story Instills Sense of Reality
Most Popular Items
» Army Raises Enlistment Age
» Army Streamlines Service Uniforms
» New Recruiting Age Limits
» Army Changes Tattoo Policy
» Top 5 Reasons People Fear Boot Camp


      Copyright 2004-2009 Activv, LLC. All rights reserved. Army.com is a service provided by Activv.
This website is not affiliated, endorsed, authorized, or associated in any way with any government, military or country.