America’s wounded warriors received a boost during the Senate Armed Services Committee budget hearing last week after Department of War Secretary Pete Hegseth endorsed the Major Richard Star Act, an overwhelmingly bipartisan measure to eliminate the ban on concurrent receipt of retirement pay and disability compensation for combat injured medical retirees. The legislation would impact nearly 60,000 combat injured veterans nationwide, approximately 2,500 of which reside in Georgia.
At issue is a practice widely known among veterans as the “wounded warrior tax,” which forces combat-injured service members who are medically retired before reaching 20 years of service to forfeit every dollar of retirement pay for every dollar of VA disability compensation they receive. The bill, named after Army Major Richard Star who died from burn pit exposure, has over 300 cosponsors in the House and nearly 80 sponsors in the Senate.
The Major Richard Star Act is not just about correcting a pay formula. It is about restoring credibility to the government’s promise to those who serve. Every recruit signs an implicit contract: that if they give their body, their time, and, if necessary, their future earning capacity, the nation will stand behind them. When we offset disability compensation against retirement pay, we break that contract. And future generations notice.
Georgia’s military footprint, from Fort Benning to Robins Air Force Base, means this issue is not theoretical here. It hits close to home. Our state has taken steps to support veterans, including expanding tax exemptions for military retirees. But federal policy still lags behind the values many states have already embraced. That gap sends the wrong message not just to today’s veterans, but to tomorrow’s recruits.
As Senator Richard Blumenthal put it, “The cost of war includes caring for our veterans.” Blumenthal is a lead sponsor of the bill who repeatedly has tried to pass the legislation, most recently calling in March for a Senate vote. But it was blocked by Republicans over concerns about funding.
The Veterans of Foreign Wars and Disabled American Veterans, among almost every veteran focused legislative group, list the bill as a top priority, proposing to fund it through the $1.7 trillion Military Retirement Fund. Opponents, including Sen. Ron Johnson, cite a broader $70 billion cost estimate for similar reforms, though the Star Act’s scope is narrower at $11 billion over 10 years. Under current congressional rules, supporters must identify funding to advance the legislation, a challenge also seen in other veteran-related bills where cost estimates shape legislative momentum.
For years, Washington has treated this inequity in federal policy as a matter of timing, cost, and legislative convenience over misguided concerns that receiving both retirement pay and disability compensation is double-dipping. Congress recognized that distinction in 2003 when it authorized concurrent receipt for longevity retirees. Retirement pay is earned compensation for years of service. Disability compensation is restitution for injury sustained in that service. They serve entirely different purposes. In 2008, Congress then created Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) to provide partial relief for combat-injured veterans but stopped short of granting full retirement benefits.
That half-measure is the problem the Major Richard Star Act finally solves. Lawmakers have attempted to eliminate the ban on concurrent receipt by tacking the Major Richard Star Act and similar legislation to the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), but those efforts have also stalled or been blocked by procedural hurdles. Now, with War Secretary Hegseth publicly backing the solution, the debate has shifted in favor of passage.
Military retired pay and CRSC are disbursed from the Military Retirement Fund. Contributions into the fund are made through annual appropriations from the Department of War (DOW) and the Department of Homeland Security (for the Coast Guard), and by the Treasury through intergovernmental transfers. A Board of Actuaries determines how much DOW and Treasury must contribute annually to cover future obligations. When Congress first authorized concurrent receipt in 2003 it included a provision that required the Treasury to pay for the additional costs incurred by the expansion of the benefit. In a December 2024 Report to the President and Congress, the Board of Actuaries stated that for increased transparency of the costs of concurrent receipt “Congress should re-examine how the MRF is funded” and suggested shifting funding responsibility to the War Department budget.
Hegseth’s endorsement of the Major Richard Star Act matters because it reflects a growing bipartisan consensus to correct the injustice. The question is no longer whether the current policy is wrong. It’s no longer a debate about coalition. It’s about whether Congress is willing to act.
William J. Black, III, is a Georgia attorney and combat-disabled veteran of the U.S. Air Force.
