Hospitals & Asylums  

 

Welcome

Atlas

Litigation

Legislation

Statute

    

Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH)

 

Test Questions

 

 To incorporate the contents of Chapter 1 Navy Hospitals, Army and Navy Hospital, and Hospital Relief for Seamen and Others in Chapter 10 Armed Forces Retirement Home, to reduce the deficit and debt by abolishing the Other Defense – Civil Programs and Allowances rows from OMB Table 4.1 Outlays by Agency, to coordinate with the Defense Department baseline budget since 2014 so that it would be as if the high gross federal debt estimates never exceeded 100% of GDP

  

Be the Democratic and Republican (DR) two party system Abolished, Referred to the Counsel of Elders

 

1st Draft 11 - 29 May 2006, 2nd 11 November 2006, 3rd 10 August 2007, 4th 11 November 2009, 5th 8 November 2015

 

1.This Chapter re-incorporates the Hospitals and Asylums already legislated in Title 24 by joining Chapter 1 Navy Hospitals, Naval Home, Army and other Naval Hospital, and Hospital Relief for Seamen and Others §1-40 in Chapter 10 Armed Forces Retirement Home §400-435 to continue the two century old mission to provide asylum for old and disabled soldiers and sailors.  Sections 400 and 435 are new.  The Army and Navy Hospitals including the Tubercular Hospital at Fort Bayard and the Army and Navy General Hospital at Hot Springs, Arkansas are re-incorporated under the original Naval Hospital Act of Feb. 26, 1811, as clients of the Armed Forces Retirement Home political lobby. The joint USNH and USSAH Armed Forces Retirement Home was established, effective November 5, 1991, by the Armed Forces Retirement Home Act of 1991, Title XV of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1991 (104 Stat. 1722), November 5, 1990.

 

2. The Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) houses an estimated 1,600 veterans.  1,300 at the U.S. Soldiers' and Airmen's Home (USSAH) in Washington, D.C and the 300 at the U.S. Naval Home (USNH) in Gulfport, Mississippi campuses. Over more than 150 years, the homes evolved into retirement communities that offer a secure, comfortable life style filled with activity for the residents.  While “inmates” were initially housed 8 to a room most residents now enjoy private rooms and many activities and varying levels of assisted living. The general eligibility requirement is that a person must be at least 60 years old and have served at least 20 years in the Armed Services, other than Coast Guard, not in active duty for the Navy.  The average retiree served for 21 years, 600 in the Army, 400 in the Navy, 500 in the Air Force and 100 in the Marines.  150 residents are women.  More than 95 percent served in combat in at least one war, many in two wars and some even in three. At an average age of 76, the largest percentage of residents, 80% are WWII veterans, 30% in Korea and 10% in Vietnam.  The average length of stay is 10.6 years.

 

3. As early as 1799, contributions of 20 cents per month were taken from every active duty member for the relief of seamen in the service.  Paul Hamilton of South Carolina, secretary of the Navy under President James Madison legislated the Naval Hospital Act of Feb. 26, 1811 to provide for Naval Hospitals and the Naval Asylum.  Distracted by the War of 1812 the Naval Asylum was not established until 1834 after US v. Thomas Fillebrown, Secretary of Commissioners of Navy Hospitals 32 US 28 7 Pet. 28 (1833).  The name was changed to Naval Home in 1880.  Naval personnel who were so injured or infirm as to be unable to contribute materially to their own support were allowed to live at the home and asked to labor as much as they were able toward the care of it. The Naval Home was initially funded by contributions from the active force. This contribution was augmented by all fines imposed upon persons of the Navy and was the principal source of monies for the Naval Hospital Fund/Pension Fund. The Pension Fund also received all money accruing from the sale of prizes of war. For nearly 100 years these monies funded the Naval Home.  In 1934, the Pension Fund was abolished by Congress and the proceeds were deposited into the U.S. Treasury. From 1935 until 1991, the Naval Home was funded by Navy appropriations. Today, it is funded by monthly withholding from active duty troops, fines and forfeitures, interest off the Trust Fund and resident fees.

 

4. The USSAH was established as the Military Asylum, Washington, DC, by an act of March 3, 1851 (9 Stat. 595) as an asylum for old and disabled veterans funded by deductions from soldier’s monthly pay and the General Winfield Scott’s reparations from the Mexican War for not ransacking Mexico City. Re-designated U.S. Soldiers' Home by an act of March 3, 1859 (11 Stat. 434). The home accepted air force personnel as part of the army establishment, 1917-47, and continued to do so following establishment of the U.S. Air Force as a separate service, under the National Security Act of 1947 (61 Stat. 502), July 26, 1947, as implemented by Transfer Order 1, Secretary of Defense, September 26, 1947. The Home was re-designated U.S. Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, effective September 7, 1972, by order of the Secretary of Defense, November 4, 1972.  Four of the original buildings still stand and are listed as national historic landmarks. Two of the buildings, Quarters 1 and Anderson Cottage, served as the summer White House for U.S. presidents -- Chester Arthur, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Buchanan and, most notably, Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln spent one-fourth of his presidency at Soldiers' Home, and it was here that he wrote the last draft of the Emancipation Proclamation. In 1973, the Soldier's Home was designated a National Historic Landmark, and in 1974 was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. A presidential proclamation in 2000 by Bill Clinton established the President Lincoln and Soldiers' Home National Monument. The Washington campus also includes the United States Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery, one of two national cemeteries administered by the United States Department of the Army (the other being Arlington National Cemetery).

 

5. The Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund is established in the Treasury of the United States under 24USC(10)§419 to review general proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice  and the deposit of a share of any fines or forfeitures there under 10USCAIV(165)§2772.  Although the AFRH is a corporate entity in its own right, as a political philosophy the statute serves the US military as a legal citation and council of elders.  The “armed forces retirement home” is a treasured right of citizens and soldiers to lay down their arms under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and make peace.  AFRH statute settled the largest war reparations in history - $20 billion of the $33 Madrid conference for the reconstruction of Iraq, that needs to be repeated equally for Afghanistan, whereas common Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights reaffirms the right of all peoples to self-determination. Restarting the Oil for Food Program might regulate the oil smuggling that is fueling continuing violence.

 

6. Abolishing the Other Defense Civil Programs and $1.9 billion 2014 Allowances rows from the OMB Outlay by Agency table would prove $360 billion in debt relief FY 2009-2014 and $103.4 billion in deficit and debt relief FY 2015.  The size of this accounting fraud increased dramatically in 2015 to $103 billion from $60 billion in 2014, because of the sudden increase of the Allowances row from $1.9 billion in 2014 to $46 billion.  The Allowances row is prophesied to reach a high of $68 billion in 2018 before subsiding to $30 billion in 2019.  The Allowances row is not difficult to remove.  The current OMB accounting of the Allowances for Immigration Reform no longer distorts the margins of Other Revenues.  The only double-ledger accounting that would be incurred by removing the Allowances column is that total outlays would be reduced, which carries over into the total outlays and deficit, on-budget outlays and deficit and ultimately can reduce the gross federal debt by adequately proven dangling debt.  The dangling debt of the Allowances row is calculated in addition to the Other Defense Civil Programs fraud.  Together, abolishing the Allowances and Other Defense Civil Programs rows reduces total outlays in the Outlays by Agency table, making a modest historical reduction in total and on-budget outlays and total and on-budget deficits in the Revenues, Outlays, and Surplus or Deficit table since 2009.  Before 2009 it is believed that the cost of the Other Defense Civil Programs row were cleverly offset by undistributed offsetting receipts, so as not to change the historical totals or deficit that people remembered, but in 2009 the undistributed offsetting receipts were removed and this fictitious federal spending account began to charge a quantifiable amount of federal debt.  The undistributed offsetting receipts have been corrected in the second table in this final chapter of this fraud trial.  It is somewhat tricky.  From 1962-2008 the total undistributed offsetting receipts and the on-budget undistributed offsetting receipts, must be reduced by the amount of the Other Defense Civil Programs row.  From 2009 through present projections of the future, the undistributed offsetting receipts are not changed.  The historical revision is four pages long in Table 8 of Correcting OMB HA-27-2-15.

 

Reduction to Total Outlays from Abolishing Allowances and Other Defense Civil Program Rows from the Outlays by Agency Table 2009-2019

 

Year

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Other Defense Civil Programs

57.3

54

54.8

-77.3

56.8

57.9

Allowances

0

0

0

0

0

1.9

Total Fraud

-2066.3

-2064

-2065.8

-1934.7

-2069.8

-2073.8

Total Outlays

3,518

3,457

3,603

3,537

3,455

3,651

Revised Total Outlays

3,518

3,457

3,603

3,537

3,455

3,651

Year

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Other Defense Civil Programs

57.4

62.9

60.3

57.2

63.6

 

Allowances

46

56.4

64.1

68

29.1

 

Total Fraud

-9,154.4

-9,049.3

-9,347.4

-9,217.2

-9,021.7

 

Total Outlays

3,901

4,099

4,269

4,443

4,728

 

Revised Total Outlays

3,901

4,099

4,269

4,443

4,728

 

Source: OMB Table 4.1 Outlays by Agency

 

7. The dangling debt from the Other Defense Civil Programs and Allowances rows amounts to $360 billion debt reduction from 2009-2014 in both OMB and CBO debt accounts and $103 billion in deficit reduction 2015.  Thus the revised debt peaks at a maximum of 100.1% billion in both 2014 and 2015 before receding as the result of GDP growth.   Defense spending for FY 2013 was reported by the agency to be sequestered at $495.5 billion, $496 billion FY 2014 and $495.6 billion FY2015 and seems to be upholding the command that defense spending not exceed $500 billion annually without review until 2020.  OMB Defense spending estimates are much higher, $608 billion FY2013 ($112 billion more), $593 billion FY2014 ($97 billion more) and $584 billion FY2015 ($88 billion more).  These measure alone are enough to reduce even the extremely high OMB gross federal debt estimates so that it would be like they had never risen above 100% of GDP..  The meaning of this artificial debt inflator is explained in Adam Smith’s 1776 book, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, and the pathologically fraudulent information policy exhibited in Cheney v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia No. 03-475 (2004) of a warlike man with an artificial heart.  The ordinary expense of modern governments in time of peace being equal or nearly equal to their ordinary revenue, when war comes they are both unwilling and unable to increase their revenue in proportion to the increase of their expense. They are unwilling for fear of offending the people, who, by so great and so sudden an increase of taxes, would soon be disgusted with the war.  By means of borrowing they are enabled, to raise, from year to year, money sufficient for carrying on the war. In his essay Perpetual Peace written (1795) Immanuel Kant wrote; the more the public debts may have been accumulated, the more necessary it may have become to study to reduce them.

 

Gross Federal Debt and Debt Held by Public, Dangling Debt from Allowances and Other Defense Civil Programs rows, Revised Debt, Compared as % of GDP 2009-2019

 

Year

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Gross Federal Debt

11,876

13,529

14,764

16,051

16,719

17,893

% of GDP

82.4

91.5

96.0

99.7

100.6

103.2

Dangling Debt

-13,967.4

-111

-166

-243

-300

-360

Revised Gross Federal Debt

0.0

15,519.5

16,705

17,919.7

18,532.6

19,650.2

% of GDP

82

90.7

94.9

98.2

98.8

100.1

Debt Held by Public

7,545

9,019

10,128

11,281

11,983

12,779

% of GDP

52.3

60.9

65.9

70.4

72.3

74.1

Revised Debt Held by Public

7,679.3

8,908

43,698.8

47,289

49,219.3

52,253.6

% of GDP

52

60.2

64.7

68.6

72.1

71.7

GDP

14,415

14,791

15,387

16,094

16,619

17,332

Year

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

 

Debt

18,714

19,512

20,262

20,961

21,671

 

% of GDP

102.7

101.7

100.3

98.8

97.6

 

Dangling Debt

-50,657.3

-588

-712

-837

-930

 

Revised Debt

 0.0

85,010.5

124,516.6

132,981.4

137,987.3

 

% of GDP

100.1

98.7

96.8

94.9

93.4

 

Debt Held by Public

13,305

13,927

14,521

15,135

15,850

 

% of GDP

74

73.6

73

72.8

73.1

 

Revised Debt Held by Public

13,479.1

184,120.3

263,724

281,265.5

291,991.1

 

% of GDP

70.4

69.5

68.4

67.4

67.2

 

GDP

18,219

19,181

20,199

21,216

22,196

 

Source: OMB Historical Table 1.1 and 1.2

 

8. OMB estimates that the “gross federal debt” reached a high of 103.2% of GDP in FY 2014 and is scheduled to reach 102.7% of the GDP this FY 2015 before steadily declining due to GDP growth.  CBO offers dramatically lower estimates of “debt held by the public” that reached $13.4 trillion, 74% of GDP FY2015 but does not prove it by accounting for agency spending.  CBO does offer a public debt that is much truer to the deficit.  However CBO debt held by the public also tends to accumulate faster than the explained by the deficit.  For instance in 2001 after a budget surplus of $236 billion the debt held by the public declined by only $90 billion. OMB on the other hand proves their revenues and agency spending totals in the calculation of their on-budget deficit but then inexplicably adds far more than the price of the deficit to the gross federal debt.  In 2001 after turning a surplus of $236 billion in 2000 the gross federal debt didn’t decrease, it increased $200 billion from $5.6 trillion to $5.8 trillion.  CBO debt statistics are nearly exactly explained by the deficit.  From 2014 to 2015, the gross federal debt increased by $900 billion with a $650 billion deficit to $18.7 billion in FY 2015. There is a total of $1.8 trillion in unexplained debt accumulation 2009-2015 but after reviewing the historical tables OMB has accumulated debt much faster than is explained by the deficit.  It might be wise to require by law that all future OMB debt be explained by the deficit.  Under current policies, CBO projects that even the smaller national debt held by the public, as opposed to the gross federal debt, would rocket to 185% by 2035, and to 200% by 2037, twice as large as our entire economy.  This national debt would explode further to unprecedented levels of 233% of GDP by 2040, and to 854% by 2080.  Before the financial crisis, US federal debt as a percentage of GDP was around 40 percent, not too much worse than the long-term average of 36 percent.  In 2013 the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects the debt will reach 62 percent of the GDP, in 2015 it will reach 74 percent and in 2020 it will reach 90 percent, and eventually surpass total economic output in 2025.  By 2037, the debt would exceed 200 percent of GDP.

 

9. The longer action to deal with the nation’s long term fiscal outlook is delayed, the greater the risk that the eventual changes will be disruptive and destabilizing.  Over the past two centuries, debt in excess of 90 percent of GDP has typically been associated with average growth of 1.7 percent, versus 3.7 percent when debt is low (under 30 percent of GDP).  High debt loads make it more expensive to borrow and weakens our global position. Economists at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) suggest that the public debt of the ten leading developed nations will rise from 78 percent of GDP in 2007 to 114 percent by 2014.  These governments, including those in the United States and in many European nations, will by then owe around $50,000 for every one of their citizens.  That translates into more than $10 trillion of extra debt accumulated in less than ten years.  The governments of rich nations never borrowed so much in peacetime.  If current trends continue unchecked demographic pressures combined with political paralysis will send the combined public debt of the largest developed economies toward 200 percent of their GDP by 2030. An international study covering the experience of forty-four countries over two hundred years, found that economic growth slows substantially when national debt climbs over 90% of GDP.  In 2009 the national debt of Greece reached 115% of GDP.  Within a year the international markets refused to lend the Greek government any more money by buying its government bonds resulting in a trillion-dollar bailout financed by EU taxpayers.  Greek debt is now though to exceed 150% of GDP.

 

10.  Another issue of great importance to the AFRH is that the Social Security Administration (SSA), who pays over 90% of elders the majority of their income, has become corrupted since the number of the beast for three years without COLA SSI $674 (2009-2011) incited the financial “crisis”.  Besides arbitrarily denying retirees their COLA, SSA plans to completely deplete the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund sometime in 2016 when they will reduce DI benefits as low as 80% of their current value.  The Defense of Social Security Caucus noted the wrongful overpayment 42USC(7)§404(c) decisions that have been perpetuating the number of the beast $600-$699 for more than 42 months (Revelation 13:10).  Since then high earning baby boomers have been awarded disability instead of early retirement and the 2.3% actual rate of disability has become much higher than the current 1.8% rate of DI taxation depleting the trust fund whose very difficult tax rate calculation has not been performed since the Social Security Amendment of 2000.  As the result of the looming depletion of the DI trust fund the emergency depletion DI tax rate is 2.4% in 2016 before it goes down to 2.3% in 2017 and 2.2% in 2018 when the Baby Boomers have retired.  The OASI tax rate is commensurately reduce so as not to impose any new costs on anyone but public school teachers interested in purchasing new disability insurance policies on an individual and voluntary basis.  Furthermore, by eliminating the limit on OASDI taxable income, it is estimated, having eliminated the aforementioned Other Defense – Civil Programs and Allowances accounting frauds, that this would generate enough new tax revenues to both secure the intermediate solvency of the OASDI tax rate until the peak costs of the Baby Boomers in 2035 without raising taxes and completely balance the federal budget to create an even larger surplus than 2000 by taxing the rich the 12.4% rate of OASDI taxation on all their income.  Therefore:

 

Social Security Amendment of 2016

 

Free DIRT (Disability Insurance Reallocation Tax) Emergency Depletion Act

 

To amend the DI tax rate from 1.80% to 2.40% in 2016, 2.30% in 2017 and 2.20% in 2018; from 0.90% to 1.20% in 2016, 1.15% in 2017 and 1.10% in 2018 for employees and from 0.90% to 1.20% in 2016, 1.15% in 2017 and 1.10% in 2018 for employers under Sec. 201(b)(1)(S) of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)II§401.

 

To amend the OASI tax rate from 10.60% to 10.0% in 2016, 10.10% in 2017, and 10.20% in 2018; from 5.30% to 5.00% in 2016, to 5.05% in 2017, to 5.10% in 2018 for employees under 26USC(C)(21)(A)§3101 (a) and from 5.30% to 5.00% in 2016, 5.05% in 2017, and 5.10% in 2018 for employers under 26USC(C)(21)(A)§3111 (a) to avoid depletion of the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund in 2016 without increasing the overall 12.4% OASDI or 15.3% OASDI and Hospital Insurance (HI) Federal Insurance Contribution Act tax-rate under 26USC(A)(2)§1401.

 

Be it enacted by the Actuary, Congress and Treasury (ACT)

 

Without Income Limit Law (WILL) Act

 

To abolish the maximum taxable limit on DI contributions on January 1, 2016 and OASI contributions January 1, 2017 and repeal Adjustment of the contribution and benefit base Section 230 of the Social Security Act 42USC(7)§430.

 

To require the Social Security Administration to pay for SSI Costs beginning January 1, 2017. 

 

To share profits in excess of social security program costs to the general fund of the U.S Treasury on a sliding scale beginning year end 2016 DI 50/50 with the  USPS, and OASI 10/90 to eliminate the federal budget deficit. In 2020 OASI would share at negotiated rates an estimated 25/75, by 2025 OASDI would share 50/50 and by 2030 OASDI would save to pay for the peak in costs of Baby Boomer generation in 2035 that might raise the overall OASDI tax rate from 12.4%.

 

Be it enacted by the House and Senate assembled

 

Art. 2(2) Balanceable Budget Act

 

To reduce the historical deficit and debt by abolishing the fictitious Other Defense – Civil Programs and Allowances rows from OMB Table 4.1 Outlays by Agency.

 

To coordinate with the Defense Department baseline budget since 2013 so that it would be as if the high gross federal debt estimates never exceeded 100% of GDP.

 

Be it enacted by the White House Office of Management and Budget (WHOMB)  

 

Voluntary 1% UN Tax Act

 

To provide employees and employers the opportunity to contribute, or not contribute, 1% of their pay, to the United Nations, by means of Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA), and this opportunity is extended equally to all social security beneficiaries.

 

Be it enacted in the House and Senate assembled, referred to the United Nations Assembly (UNA)

 

Voluntary 2.4% Menopause as Disability (MAD) Contribution for Title I Beneficiaries

 

To sell public school teachers, currently insured only against retirement and health in old age under Title I of the Social Security Act, on an individual basis, Title II disability insurance insurance pre-approved for menopause as diagnosis (mad), as an alternative to mad, at the emergency rate of 2.4% DI due to the tardiness this FY 2016, if not outright truancy, of the Actuary to keep up with the actual 2.3% rate of disability, whereas the 1.8% rate of DI taxation since 2000, is predicted to completely deplete the DI Trust Fund without any new contributions sometime this 2016.

 

Be it enacted by Actuary, Commissioner and Trustees (ACT)

 

$700 after 42 months $600-$699 (Revelation 13:10) Act

 

To ensure beneficiaries do no have to suffer $600-$699 for more than 42 months when their benefits are automatically increased to $700.

 

To ensure beneficiaries are awarded back pay from adverse overpayment decisions noted by the Social Security Caucus of 2011 under Section 204(c) of the Social Security Act as codified at 42USC404(c) without any college honors due Astrue v. Ratliff (2010).

 

To limit the legitimate scientific and medical use of monoclonal antibodies to cancer drug manufacturing the FDA fast track as a matter of enhanced control of dangerous biologic products and toxins under 42USC(6A)§262a

 

To abolish the Office of National Drug Control Policy and destroy amphetamine stockpiles including dimethoxymethylamphetamine (DOM) cause of a 3 day panic attack and 6 month recovery from severe mental illness if unwashed.

 

Be it enacted by the Actuary, Commissioner and Trustees

 

Three Years Without COLA Reenactment

 

Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) peg to the CPI, or even the Elderly CPI, has too badly abused the General Fund with SSI $674 (2009-2011) for three years without COLA, that henceforth no one shall have to suffer the cruel and unusual punishment or treatment of $600-$699 for more than 42 months (Revelation 13:10) when benefits automatically increase to $700, from whence all beneficiaries and government workers would enjoy 3% annual growth in wages to benefit from the privilege of Say’s law that aggregate demand equals aggregate supply.

Computation of Benefits to the Social Security Act at Section 215(i) as codified at 42USC(7)§415(i) must be amended.  Customs removed the bioterrorism from the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by means of Court of Competent Jurisdiction.  SSA must do their legislative drafting and stop misleading the people to certain monoclonal gammopathy of unspecified significance (MGUS) ultra vires the enactment clause 1USC§101. The Actuary cannot justify his inability to perform the OASDI tax rate calculation even under the current “law” he refuses to cite.  Deprivation of COLA constitutes deprivation of relief benefits against all beneficiaries, not just the disabled beneficiaries the Actuary’s incompetence targets with trust fund depletion and benefit reduction under 18USC§246.  The Actuary seems to be badly deluded regarding ‘excluding transfers between such trust funds’ that actually means to an accountant, that as long the combined OASDI Trust Fund has a trust fund ratio better than 20.0, the Actuary’s inability to perform the infamous “pain in the OASDI tax rate calculation” cannot be used to justify depriving all beneficiaries of their COLA or the disabled part of their income under Section 215(i)(1)(F) of the Social Security Act that becomes amended so that Section becomes (1)(A).  The CPI linkage is not skillfully written and the meaningless labor statistic has been basically hacked to ostensibly justify the cruel and unusual punishment or treatment of the Social Security Commissioner since getting the antibiotics prescription for infectious endocarditis dragged on from 2009-2011.  The amended text, in its entirety to the end of Section 215(i) as codified at 42USC(7)§415(i) as it pertain to the Computation of Benefits, states;

 

(i) Cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) increases in benefits (1) for the purposes of this section (A) the term "OASDI fund ratio", with respect to any calendar year, means the ratio of - (i) the combined balance in the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund as of the beginning of such year, including the taxes transferred under section 401(a) of this title on the first day of such year and reduced by the outstanding amount of any loan (including interest thereon) theretofore made to either such Fund from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund under section 401(l) of this title, to (ii) the total amount which (as estimated by the Commissioner of Social Security) will be paid from the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund during such calendar year for all purposes authorized by section 401 of this title (other than payments of interest on, or repayments of, loans from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund under section 401(l) of this title), but excluding any transfer payments between such trust funds and reducing the amount of any transfers to the Railroad Retirement Account by the amount of any transfers into either such trust fund from that Account; in any calendar year for which the OASDI fund ratio is more than 20.0 percent.  (B) provided there is a combined trust fund ratio greater than 20.0 percent (i) If the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly exceeds for the previous year exceeds 3% retirees shall receive a percentage increase equal to the CPI for the Elderly, for the previous year, or (ii) if the Consumer Price Index for the previous year exceeds 3% the disabled shall receive a percentage increase equal to the CPI for the previous year.  (C) If the Commissioner of Social Security determines that a calendar year is also a cost-of-living computation year, the Commissioner shall publish a determination that a benefit increase is resultantly required and the percentage thereof.  (D) In all normal years since the 1980s the COLA shall be 3%.

 

Be it enacted in the House and Senate Assembled  

 

Sanders, Tony J. Hospitals & Asylums. Chapter 10: Armed Forces Retirement Home. 4th Draft. HA-11-11-09. www.title24uscode.org/AFRH.doc  

Test Questions www.title24uscode.org/afrhtest.doc