Agent Orange bill
Agent Orange bill
A newly proposed federal law will afford certain VA benefits to more U.S. Navy Vietnam veterans.
House Bill 543, known as the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act, will allow naval personnel engaged in the Vietnam War — including those who served at sea and never had boots on the ground — to receive benefits for Agent Orange exposure.
If approved, the bill would change current VA regulations to say anyone in the Navy who served in Vietnam's territorial waters can get Agent Orange benefits. Territorial waters are those within 12 miles of shore.
The U.S. used Agent Orange as a defoliant in Vietnam. It has been linked to cancer and various nerve, respiratory and digestive disorders.
We veterans need the support of the American people for this bill to become a reality. We ask people to contact their members of Congress to co-sponsor the bill, which was introduced by Rep. Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.).
Additionally, please go to causes.com and, in the search box, type “Agent Orange Act” and sign the petition.
John J. Bury
Media, Delaware County
The writer is retired from the U.S Navy and a Vietnam War veteran.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Good riddance
- Reverse red-kettle ban I
- Reverse red-kettle ban II
- Not taxpayers’ responsibility
- Leaders unaccountable
- Incomprehensible? That’s Obama
- Help for Tina
- No ground troops
- Punishment pushback I
- Don’t blame bus drivers II
- Lawsuit: Publicity stunt