Should Veteran’s Organizations Merge?

TSgt Chuck Mankin — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:59:47 -0500

Should Veteran’s Organizations Merge?

With 0.5 percent of American’s serving in the military that leaves only about 1.6 million people who have served that are alive today. The three big Veteran’s organizations which come to mind, at least in my area in the NE US are the American Legion, the Marine Corps League, and the Veterans’ of Foreign War. Each has their own membership requirements with the Legion seeming to be the organization that is most inclusive of all vets in the American Legion. The common thread that all veterans organizations share is declining membership and wondering why so many young vets are not joining.

While I don’t have an answer for that other than the possibility that many young vets see the various organizations as retirement homes where old Vietnam and WWII vets sit around, drink cheap beer and talk about their glory days. One issue I see is that maybe there is just too many organiztions fighting for too few vets today. While each organization has it’s own focus based on membership maybe it’s time to just say a vet is a vet and we are all getting a raw deal these days from the VA and from many others too. I think that combining the organizations is a sure way to ensure that any of these organizations continue to offer the services they do to veterans and to the communities they reside in.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jan 11 at 2016 1:13 PM

PO1 John Miller — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:13:00 -0500

While I don't have an answer, I agree. I am a member of various veteran organizations: VFW, American Legion, DAV, and FRA, but I am not active an any of them. The reason being is what you've stated. The few times I do go to the Legion or VFW posts, it's a bunch of older vets drinking beer and talking. Sure I like putting back a few cold ones and talking story as much as the next guy, but I want more than that.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 11 at 2016 1:15 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:15:30 -0500

Where did you get the 1.6 million figure?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 1:22 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:22:35 -0500

I think you will see the opposite. More smaller, more localized - catering to what different populations want.

Response by SFC Wade W. made Jan 11 at 2016 1:30 PM

SFC Wade W. — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:30:42 -0500

The VFW, American Legion and DAV all have charters granted by Congress. It took months and even years to be recognized as non-profit veteran focused groups. They each have there purpose and direct their energies in accordance with their charters. Each organization brings in millions of dollars each year to take care of veterans and their families. BTW your numbers are wrong.bthere are currently around 4 million vets that are out there.

Response by SA Harold Hansmann made Jan 11 at 2016 1:37 PM

SA Harold Hansmann — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:37:57 -0500

I am sure you would have a lot of arguements about which charity/ group each wanted to sponsor.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Jan 11 at 2016 1:40 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:40:38 -0500

I think a more effective question would be when are the older established vet orgs going to recognize the efforts of the younger vets who bled the same way they did, just 70+ years later. That will be a big hang up with some. Also another that wasn't mentioned are the grass roots vet orgs on FB, LinkIn, and on the Net. I believe combining them while not trying to be WWP (they seem to have left a bad taste in many I know), but have a identity that resonates with the current crop and the older crop would be best. VFW and The American Legion would benefit from this greatly if they reached out to those grass roots orgs and got them under their banner proving they're more than just a watering hole for the elderly.

Response by SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT made Jan 11 at 2016 2:39 PM

SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 14:39:02 -0500

Never joined the American Legion which does not include the Cold War Veterans of Europe.
I am a life member of VFW, DAV, AMVETS, NCOA and the MP & Signal Corps

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 3:09 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:09:31 -0500

Being a member of the Legion...I don't think the sheer "administrivia" involved would make this a feasible/effective decision. The Legion's standard is pretty broad...I can't imagine many who would not "qualify", so long as they have a DD214 in hand. Here are the current periods of eligible service:

World War I: April 6, 1917 and November 11, 1918

World War II: December 7, 1941 and December 31, 1946

Korean War: June 25, 1950 and January 31, 1955

Vietnam War: February 28, 1961 and May 7, 1975

Lebanon/Grenada: August 24, 1982 and July 31, 1984

Operation Just Cause - Panama: December 20, 1989 and January 31, 1990

*Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm: August 2, 1990 until the date of the end of hostilities as determined by the government of the United States

*Because eligibility dates remain open, all members of the US Armed Forces are eligible to join The American Legion at this time.

The very small window of "ineligibility" seems to be confined only to the less than four years between WWII and Korea (and let's be honest, those guys would be pretty aged right now), the six years between Korea and Vietnam, the less than five years between Grenada and Panama, and the winter and spring of 1990. Even then, I'd be willing to bet there are Service Officers at Posts who find ways around any "technicality".

Everyone has different experiences...but I've never experienced the Legion to be a "Vets Only Bar". However, neither are these organizations official arms of the VA.

Response by PO2 Michael Berry made Jan 11 at 2016 3:33 PM

PO2 Michael Berry — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:33:45 -0500

The Veteran cause & support would better serve all ofs more efficiently.

Response by SGT James Allen made Jan 11 at 2016 6:29 PM

SGT James Allen — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 18:29:56 -0500

As a member of the VFW, I used to be very active in the Honor Guard and as Chaplain. My priorities changed after starting a family with twin girls. Now my time is spent raising them with my wife.

Response by Maj Jerry Hayes made Jan 12 at 2016 7:28 AM

Maj Jerry Hayes — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:28:29 -0500

I would probably be worthwhile to see if the various organizations would be willing to hold a high-level conference on the subject. Merging the organizations would be difficult given the fact that there would be winners and losers in such a move, e.g., staffs, budgets, traditions, culture, etc. Unless the "handwriting on the wall" is apparent, most organizations would resist such a move. Budgets and membership losses will probably drive any ultimate decisions. Good leadership in such a move is vital. Those in favor would have to be highly respected by almost everyone.

Response by PO1 Don Mac Intyre made Jan 12 at 2016 8:46 AM

PO1 Don Mac Intyre — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:46:56 -0500

A more welcoming reception would be a key to recruiting membership.

Response by CAPT Paul Frost made Jan 12 at 2016 9:16 AM

CAPT Paul Frost — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:16:08 -0500

TSgt Mankin, Each organization has it's own priorities, but they do get together in TMC (The Military Coalition http://www.themilitarycoalition.org/) to advocate for veterans, currently serving and families on the Hill.

404 - Page Not Found

Response by CPT Matthew Bate made Jan 12 at 2016 9:32 AM

CPT Matthew Bate — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:32:16 -0500

I think there's closer to 20 million veterans alive today, which is about 6.5% of the total us population. I think the more organizations, the better. Perhaps there could be some coordination among their leadership's, but each organization focuses on a different facet of veteran's needs, even if only slightly varied. And I'm not sure combining agencies will solve the problem you raise (cost/activities/benefits).

http://www.va.gov/vetdata/Quick_Facts.asp

Quick Facts - NATIONAL CENTER FOR VETERANS ANALYSIS AND STATISTICS

Veteran related quick facts

Response by SGT G Raymond Raulerson made Jan 12 at 2016 9:38 AM

SGT G Raymond Raulerson — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:38:39 -0500

Having been a professional service officer on the national level for one of the self-proclaimed “leaders” in the field of Veteran’s Advocacy for about 20 years and having seen the Veterans system from both inside and outside the old way of doing business is dead! That old way includes the Veteran Service Organizations (VSO’s); they, singly each and every one of them, have served their purpose that is not to say that there is not a place for them. For example The American Legion (ALG), Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), Disabled American Veterans (DAV) [the REAL BIG THREE VSO’s] and then Paralyzed Veterans of America, Military order of the Purple Heart, Vietnam Veterans of America and I could continue to go on and on. All of these old stalwart organizations are MEMBERSHIP driven and thus must, even though they have a 501 (c) protection , realize a profit to function and pay staff such as service officers and secretaries as well as directors, lobbyists/advocates and attorneys don’t let the bottom line on paper fool you the donations they receive and the other items of value (such as property as in land, houses, cars, etc.) are a profit but since they have no stock holders to pay a dividend to it supposedly goes to services. The big question is how much really goes to services as opposed to salaries.
But, returning to the real question at hand: Should the Veterans Service Organizations Merge? I believe that in today’s reality the VSO’s are going to have to merge in order to not only protect themselves; but, to service their clients, the Veterans, and fulfil the Congressional Charter that they so passionately claim makes them different from any other Veterans Representative/Advocate. Also, since Private Agents and REAL Attorneys have been authorized by LAW (since 2006) to represent Veterans before not only the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) but the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) the old stalwarts VSO’s must now truly hold themselves to a higher standard; because, one does not need to seek the advise of one of the old “VSO’s” and become a member one need merely find an attorney or Private Agent or even one of the New VSO’s that do not require or even have a need for membership (some even state you paid for your membership with your service to this country!
So the bottom line is they must unite or perish!

Response by SFC George Crabtree made Jan 12 at 2016 9:39 AM

SFC George Crabtree — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:39:01 -0500

Veteran Organizations are only as effective as their leadership. Like all organizations. They need to recruit, advertise and make a difference. They need to be flexible and current. Brick and mortar is expensive: use the local meeting houses and save those dollars to make highly visible differences in the lives of Vets in that community. If the the old farts, the homeless and the disabled are taken care of, move on to other community needs. Volunteer-even a couple hours a week, properly managed, can make a huge difference in rural areas and to urban youth. Team Rubicon is made up of young, fit, Vets who help in disasters. Link up with the county EMS folks and take an active role in drills. Each of the Veterans organizations has a niche: the legion is for all honorable vets, VFW is for those who have seen the elephant (even if only a picture of one), DAV serves the wounded. Merging would less serve those with special concerns. They should cooperate and coordinate but that is more leadership. If they were more ably lead, they would flourish. They would be seen. They would make a difference. Again.

Response by SrA Dennis Noncek made Jan 12 at 2016 10:02 AM

SrA Dennis Noncek — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:02:46 -0500

Yes

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2016 10:03 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:03:10 -0500

Perhaps the approach to take on this issue is to have an organization like the Joint Chiefs of Staff for DoD, a United Veterans of sorts. The idea is that this group can help each organization coordinate their activities to better serve Veterans. This organization would not be command function or one to merge the organizations as each has their own unique purpose.

Response by PFC Al Sethre made Jan 12 at 2016 10:18 AM

PFC Al Sethre — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:18:55 -0500

I feel that only their bar operations should merge. I've been to a few towns where the Legion and VFW share the same bar, because separately, they both could not afford to keep their operations running after the WWII vets began to pass away in greater numbers.

Response by SPC Robert Garcia made Jan 12 at 2016 10:25 AM

SPC Robert Garcia — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:25:43 -0500

We're not going to drink our sorrows away. We are smarter.

Response by CWO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2016 10:30 AM

CWO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:30:48 -0500

There is always strengthen in numbers. I think your numbers are off when it comes to the total numbers of "people" who have served however. According to the VA there are around 1.6 million vets in Texas alone and 1.8 vets in California, so your numbers are off. But if all veterans were in one organization it would have a very power voice and not only a voice but a lot of funds to move issues forward. There is strength in numbers.

Response by SN Dorance Gray made Jan 12 at 2016 10:36 AM

SN Dorance Gray — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:36:12 -0500

no won't work

Response by Sgt Benton Garrison made Jan 12 at 2016 11:27 AM

Sgt Benton Garrison — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:27:10 -0500

Don't agree, each organization has its own function and missions. For one MCL is exclusively for Marines, combat and noncombatant, we are not "just vets". The VFW is for combat veterans, different frame of mind and experience. The Legion is for all veterans. All these organizations do community service and is a place where a veteran gets the support they can only get from veterans who have had similar experiences.

Response by Sgt Frank Rinchich made Jan 12 at 2016 12:16 PM

Sgt Frank Rinchich — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:16:57 -0500

No way under any circumstances should they merge, first there are no beer drinking story telling organizations I know of, and I belong to two, VFW and Marine Corps League, we have completely different stances on about everything. I have been in the VFW for a number of years, have over 500 member. to this day I doubt I know 50 vets. and I am the senior vice commander. where as been in the MCL 6 years and from day one I felt like family . and had personal contact with everyone. We work at a completely different way to raise money for charity. I have had marines in the VFW say that the MCL was to gung ho for them, and I disagree with you on there being to few vets, there are thousands of vets to pull from if the organizations would just seek them out and offer them a place they feel comfortable in .you can't just have a vet sign a form to become a member , you have to make sure he is the focal point of your organization. And make that vet feel he is part of something good. and statements like you made even though in a satire way about old age homes and beer drinking and story telling does more damage then good in recruiting vets. ( just a side note, after 8 years in the VFW I have yet to hear a combat story from any vet. Our job to recruiting vets is to welcome them as a vet and let them know they are part of something good. good for them and good for their community.

Response by SGT Mark Sprague made Jan 12 at 2016 1:28 PM

SGT Mark Sprague — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:28:32 -0500

I don't think that your 1.6 number is correct. 9+ million men/women served during the Vietnam Era - my guess is that most of those people are still alive.

Response by SFC Ernest Thurston made Jan 12 at 2016 2:32 PM

SFC Ernest Thurston — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:32:27 -0500

No I don't think they should merge. We have more clout with Congress when there are five or six guys siting at the table saying the same thing from different angles then if we just sent one person. Each organization has it's own place at the table. My vets are members of several organizations especially retired vets. It's just like government. The smaller and more local it is, the more responsive it is to the needs of it's citizens/members. Do you want one giant organization that doesn't know you to to make decisions for you. Even though we are all vets we all have different experiences withing our respective branches. A sailor may not know how a soldier or an airman feels about a situation because they don't do the same jobs. Why should we have one mega organization represent us.

Response by PO2 Peter Klein made Jan 12 at 2016 2:44 PM

PO2 Peter Klein — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:44:47 -0500

Not all veterans organizations should be merged into one huge group. Maybe several groups based on the goals of the organizations. I do not need a VFW to go for a drink. I used my time as a board member of the Vietnam Veterans of San Diego (VVSD.) VVSD Has morphed into Veterans Village of San Diego. From its inception it has provided shelter, substance abuse consuling, job training and job placement for veterans.

Response by SFC Ernest Thurston made Jan 12 at 2016 2:45 PM

SFC Ernest Thurston — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:45:56 -0500

I could possibly see that these different organizations have sub chapters or different groups in the organization that cater to the needs of vets from a particular era/conflict. For the most part that is already happening. One reason that you don't see young vets joining is because we aren't recruiting while they are on active duty as much. Another reason is that people become joiners as they age. It's human nature. When you are young you want to experience the world and you are not interested in hanging out with older guys. I'm sure if you go back and check in the '60 most of the American Legion members were WWII and Korea vets and few were Vietnam vets returning from war. Most of the Vietnam vets probably joined in the late '70s or '80s. I know I joined the Army in '74 and didn't become a member of the VFW until '82 and the American Legion about '95.

Response by SGT Craig Northacker made Jan 12 at 2016 3:36 PM

SGT Craig Northacker — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:36:28 -0500

Congress was able to keep veterans from organizing as one unified voice to avoid any more National Lawn gatherings that 100,000 WW1 veterans did when they were fed up with the government offering bonds as compensation that would be paid in 1945 - if any vets were left alive. They came from all over the country to protest, whereupon the Army was called in and opened fire. If we have 20 plus million vets under one roof we would be incredibly powerful and be able to force change in Agencies. By segregating us and offering specific "missions", then they avoid this problem.

Next question.

Response by CPO George Rogers made Jan 12 at 2016 4:49 PM

CPO George Rogers — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:51 -0500

You forgot the FRA

Response by Lt Col Melody Hof made Jan 12 at 2016 5:00 PM

Lt Col Melody Hof — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:00:11 -0500

I think that is a good idea, the organizations are struggling for members, as a non WWII veteran there just doesn't seem to be anything for me. I belong to both but do not attend many functions at either.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Jan 12 at 2016 5:39 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:39:00 -0500

Yes this question came up in the small town where I live. The VFW and American Legion were asked to purchase a property together, sell their current club locations and operate the facility together as "The Veteran's Club". There was so much whining and back stabbing that the idea never had a chance. Now both clubs suffer from declining memberships and I would guess unless the current board members retire or die nothing will change.
In answer to your other question the usual clue that you have just joined a veterans organization is that they want to make you the commander the first year you join. Whoa pal, I started out as a Pvt in the Army and can work my way up the chain of command if I so choose. These guys wanted to make me commander right away......which was not in my plan.
There are very few veterans now a days that haven't served overseas. While serving in a combat theatre is the draw for some clubs there are more soldiers, sailors and airmen who haven't been shot at now. This group should be an easy sign up however club dues are hard to pay when a young struggling couple already are stretching their budgets to pay for the necessities in life.

Response by PO2 Weaver Brian made Jan 12 at 2016 7:07 PM

PO2 Weaver Brian — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:07:42 -0500

No. The membership criteria are too different for the various organizations. They are different for a reason, and it goes back to the founding of these organizations, and is the basis for their differing congressional charters. The VFW was formed by combat veterans from the Spanish-American Wars, the American Legion by veterans from WW1. (Not necessarily combat veterans, but everybody that was in the services at the time.) The Marine Corps League is Marines. Period. The DAV, as their name suggests, have disabilities. And the list goes on and on. The last merger that I know of was when the Grand Army of the Republic (Union veterans of the Civil War) was absorbed by the Veterans of Foreign Wars shortly after the end of WWII. They absorbed less than a dozen still alive at the time. The VFW itself is the end result of the combining of several regional organizations that sprang up after the Spanish-American Wars.
Again, the answer is no, they should not combine. That said, there may be some point in the future where the members of some of the newer, smaller organizations that have been formed by the veterans returning from our recent wars in the Mid-East may want to merge into the larger, more powerful, well established organizations. It should not happen unless their members want it to.

Response by Cpl Tracey Chapman made Jan 12 at 2016 7:16 PM

Cpl Tracey Chapman — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:16:10 -0500

It will help solve issues better with all branches working for same goal answers and help

Response by PO3 Rod Arnold made Jan 12 at 2016 7:26 PM

PO3 Rod Arnold — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:26:12 -0500

I think it's fine just the way it stands, but in a town close by, the VFW and American Legion members numbers were so low, they merged together so they could at least have one building to meet in, sad!!

Response by CW4 James Dickey made Jan 12 at 2016 7:26 PM

CW4 James Dickey — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:26:19 -0500

I can agree with them joining hands

Response by PO2 Kevin O'Connor made Jan 12 at 2016 7:28 PM

PO2 Kevin O'Connor — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:28:13 -0500

The problem with so many Veterans Service Organizations is easy to see from the outside. You have each group working towards goals for their group. Some groups are strong and some groups are small. Like USDR (Uniformed Services Disabled Retirees), includes all Chapter 61 Retirees. There only goal it to fight for those military who were forced to retire due to injuries sustained in the Service. Because they are Disabled, they earned VA Disability. Well, the Service says great, then we don't have to pay you your earned retirement pay. Yet the service branches budget for all retirees pay, and just keep the Disabled Retired Pay. USDR does not have to strength, or the money to fight, and their arguments are drowned out by the other organizations that scream louder. If Service Organizations joined forces, there wouldn't be competing groups of 50,000 t0 100,000 voices, there would be a united 1.500,000 voices. Congress knows this and plays the game of one group over the other and every once in awhile they will pass something beneficial for Veterans just so they can say "See, we Care". Just like everything else about the service, when we band together, we're a pretty formative force. So Long answer, Yes, they should join forces and merge.

Response by CW4 James Dickey made Jan 12 at 2016 7:29 PM

CW4 James Dickey — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:29:01 -0500

I agree memberships are falling every day

Response by PO2 Nick Burke made Jan 12 at 2016 9:32 PM

PO2 Nick Burke — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:32:49 -0500

I belong to the American Legion, VFW and the Navy League. While there is cross-over there are too many differences to make merging possible or desirable.

Response by SCPO Penny Douphinett made Jan 12 at 2016 9:56 PM

SCPO Penny Douphinett — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:56:01 -0500

I don't have an answer to this. I am a life member of the DAV and this is the only group I belong to. I think this organization should remain separate from the rest because their mission is very focused on disabled veterans and their needs. That mission would be weakened by joining others.

Response by SPC Lee Beach made Jan 12 at 2016 11:14 PM

SPC Lee Beach — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 23:14:30 -0500

May happen in the future, but not in near future.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jan 13 at 2016 12:32 AM

SPC Byron Skinner — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:32:26 -0500

Sp4 Byron Skinner. The short answer is No, they shouldn't merge. All of them serve individual interests and needs. I belong to two the DAV and The Military Order of the Purple Heart. The DAV has no social organization and is purely a lobbying organization. The MOPH has monthly meetings and a few special events every year. The VFW and American Legion have meeting halls around town and most have bars and they sponsor things like softball and bowling leagues for Veterans and family. Young Veterans have always resisted joining VSO's, but that will change with the Veterans of the Middle Eastern and Afghanistan conflicts start to gain leadership positions. One thing that Veterans forget is that different people joint different VSO's for various reasons. Also another reason is that the VSO's can be a big help in dealing with the VA and the relationship between the local commander of the management of the local VA and regional management can be important to individual. Example when I got out of the service and went to apply for my VA benefits I discovers that there was no VA administrative office in San Diego. One a month a representative from LA came down and the first person he saw was the local VFW commander, they were buddies, if you wanted the VA to do you claim in a timely manner you saw Otto over at the VFW, usually at the bar. I was released for active duty in April In June I was enrolled in college and getting my benefits. This was in 1967 long before computers and there were a lot more returning Veterans then there are now. This kind of service is unheard of for the current generation of Veterans.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Jan 13 at 2016 7:19 AM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 07:19:52 -0500

Your stats are terrible.

Response by SSG Douglas Egli made Jan 13 at 2016 1:07 PM

SSG Douglas Egli — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:07:01 -0500

I have always believed that with all different organizations we are defeating the purpose of our great organizations we are ALL for the veteran so why do we pull in so many ways

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 13 at 2016 1:51 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:51:45 -0500

TSgt Chuck Mankin I would say, no, only because I do not want a Monolithic beast, who becomes hyper-political and not acting in our best interest. That said, I would be in favor of the Mom and Pop Veterans Groups, who misrepresent what they can offer. Due diligence in these cases, yet the usual checks and balances on the bigger organizations.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 13 at 2016 9:12 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:12:23 -0500

Would? Should? Could? I doubt it. Each represents a different subset of veterans and, like all organizations, jealously guard their "turf".

Response by Cpl Bill Sandlin made Jan 14 at 2016 7:53 PM

Cpl Bill Sandlin — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:53:44 -0500

I belong to American Legion, VFW, DAV, Marine Corps League, 1st Marine Div. I would like a Veteran organization that for all Veterans. That organization could be split us into different Veteran groups. Younger. I do not think any of the Veteran organizations would consider merging.

Response by LTC Stephen Kubiszewski made Jan 14 at 2016 10:25 PM

LTC Stephen Kubiszewski — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:25:39 -0500

Yes but with over 45 thousand vet non-profits it is very unlike that pure greed and confusion will overcome.
We need to focus on real local options.

Response by SFC John Lee Washington made Jan 18 at 2016 4:13 PM

SFC John Lee Washington — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:13:15 -0500

We have the AMVETS

Response by SFC John Lee Washington made Jan 18 at 2016 4:18 PM

SFC John Lee Washington — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:18:48 -0500

This organization open to anyone who is currently serving, or who has honorably served, in the US Armed Forces for World War II to the present, to include the National Guard and Reserves. On July 23, 1947, President Harry S. Truman signed Public Law 216. Since then, the original charter has been amended several times to admit as members those who served in different eras.

Response by SCPO Ronald Rankin made Jan 19 at 2016 9:24 AM

SCPO Ronald Rankin — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:24:15 -0500

Not sure which way would be best. I served for over 30 years and a lot of changes during my time in. Some relate to this subject. By merging you have a bigger voice, but along with that there would be more in fighting on personal agendas of leadership. I think keeping them separate will allow for more diverse progression when dealing with current veteran needs.

Response by SFC J Fullerton made Feb 24 at 2016 2:47 PM

SFC J Fullerton — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:47:10 -0500

These VSO's have enough difficulty merging posts within their own organizations, let alone merging into one central organization. The AL and VFW is in reality a parent organization to charters and posts who govern themselves under national by-laws, as well as state and post by-laws. Most posts are merely "clubs" that follow established (and antiquated) rituals based on the ideology of its founding. This is why it has been difficult for these organizations as a whole to modernize. While one post may be vibrant and viable with youthful members in one community, there are hundreds more trapped in the 1950's with outdated activities, dilapidated buildings (if they still have one), and an aging membership that does not want to change. I would agree that merging posts into fewer, but more modern posts are a better option than merging organizations. Do away with the social club concepts of individual community posts an focus on centralized "posts" that are more diverse and pool resources.

Response by SFC J Fullerton made Feb 24 at 2016 3:26 PM

SFC J Fullerton — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:26:38 -0500

Response by SGT G Raymond Raulerson made Feb 25 at 2016 2:39 PM

SGT G Raymond Raulerson — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 14:39:29 -0500

The problem is everyone, and it is a human thing as well as a natural law, wants their own identity, even within the organization! You have the DAV, the ALG, the VFW the Purple Heart, etc., and then you have the who is better and then the infighting in the organization and the service rivalry. Bottom line we, each and every one of US Veterans’ need to start getting along, we are no longer active duty Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine or Coast Guard, WE ARE VETERANS! It is that plain and simple and it does not matter which “legitimate” Veterans Service Organization” we belong to we belong to the biggest fraternity or sorority in the world because we are VETERANS’! The VA and government love it if we cannot get along and cannot keep our organizations afloat in fact they thrive on it because we do not pose a threat to them and as long as we are not organized we cannot FORCE the VA or Congress and the President to go their job; the only time Congress, The President, the Government and the VA feared the Veteran was in May on 1932 when nearly 15,000 veterans dubbed “The Bonus Expeditionary Force” marched on our nation’s Capital; the great General Douglas MacArthur, on July 28th with Calvary and tanks, drove the Veterans out of their camps and burned the makeshift houses.
Now what does all of this have to do with: “Should Veteran’s Organizations Merge”; well it really does not matter of they do or don’t it matters if the Veterans merge! What I mean by that is their way of thinking, yes I know that I had wrote earlier that I believe that the Organizations should merge but the ego’s and history of the organizations just will not allow it, it is like trying to cross bread a dog and a cat---not gonna’ happen; but, if Veterans start merging mentally or should I say crossing over the decades old boundaries of which group is better and start just realizing WE ARE VETERANS’ and TOGETHER WE ARE STRONGER think what could be accomplished. What if just one quarter of all of the Veterans in this nation decided to march on Washington, D.C. and demand that Congress and the President FIX THE VA NOW…..do you think that would make and impression; do you think that would be better than an email from all of the Veterans?

Response by SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint made Mar 6 at 2016 7:43 PM

SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 19:43:27 -0500

Interesting question.
1. Each org as their own power structure. I doubt that any of them will fold up to one of the others.
2. It is better to have more orgs to explore more options.
3. They all fund raise, and get it from different areas...which is truly amazing.
4. There are many different service level orgs.
5. It is good to have multiple voices with VA and job fairs. (If one org is bad in an area, or local, then jump to an org that is stronger with VA.)

I also noticed you were USAF and belong to MCL. I started as a Marine and then after 7 years went to the Army which had more to offer in my MOS.
S/F

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2016 8:00 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 20:00:19 -0500

In many small areas they already have.

Response by Cpl Shawn B. made Mar 10 at 2016 11:56 PM

Cpl Shawn B. — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 23:56:38 -0500

Your numbers are wrong sorry to say, there are (According to the VA Circa 2014) 22,299,350 living Veterans. Of those 16,691,955 are war time era veterans while 5,607,395 are peacetime only veterans. How ever if you look at the demographics, there is much smaller percentage of Americans serving now than among older veterans so in that sense you are a little more on track if things stay the way they are with a much smaller percentage of veterans serving eventually the percentage is going to dwindle significantly. The vast majority of Veterans today are in fact 65 and older and will be leaving us in rapid succession in the coming years. The .5 percent number you reference may be more inline with the ammount of service members that actually see combat action today not for sure because those numbers are a lot harder to find if not published at all.

http://www.va.gov/vetdata/Veteran_Population.asp

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158729/men-women-veterans.aspx

http://www.census.gov/library/infographics/veterans.html

Veteran Population - NATIONAL CENTER FOR VETERANS ANALYSIS AND STATISTICS

Demographics for veterans by state, county, and congressional district

Response by SGT Tracey "Tra" Cooper-Harris made Jun 10 at 2016 10:51 PM

SGT Tracey "Tra" Cooper-Harris — Fri, 10 Jun 2016 22:51:37 -0400

This is a great question, but I don't think combining all the organizations will work. I'm a member of a few of the legacy VSOs (AmLegion, VFW, PVA) & Post 9/11 ones (IAVA, The Mission Continues, Team RWB, Team Rubicon). All of them have a specific niche in the veterans community, and all of them are having troubles with acquiring new members. The younger VSOs have issues with getting veterans out to participate in events to include community building, sporting events, and becoming more involved with the organization. Legacy organizations have challenges with making their organizations more appealing to younger veterans because of their image as a place for veterans to socialize in smoky bars reminiscing about glory days, but not providing an outlet to younger veterans for leadership opportunities or community building. Of course they have lobbied on our behalf to Congress for benefits and rights, but many don't see that aspect of the organizations. Add to the fact that Post 9/11 orgs have open and free membership to veterans and their families (specific tiers of access) while the legacies limit membership to veterans only is a challenge, especially since our veteran and regular families help us with engaging our communities.

There should definitely be more collaboration between all the VSOs so veterans can see the pros and cons of the organizations and make their choices to join on that. But it always seems that I get the stink eye in my legacy organizations when that suggestion comes up to do more work with other legacy or Post 9/11 Veterans Organizations.

To add to all of the above, you will have some veterans who feel that someone's service "isn't good enough" because they didn't deploy, didn't serve in direct combat, weren't in combat arms, are a woman, LGBT, have a bad paper discharge but are otherwise contributing back in positive ways in their communities, or (unfortunately) because of their race or religion. Most of the Post 9/11 organizations do collaborate and do joint projects at least at the community level. But until we as a veteran community start looking at the value of all of our organizations and looking at working collaboratively, we won't see just 1 organization for veterans.

Response by SGT James Hammons made Aug 17 at 2016 11:28 AM

SGT James Hammons — Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:28:22 -0400

Cooperate not so much merge. There should be at least one combined veterans group conference per year and more activities together. I have brought he Concerned Veterans for America out to the VFW Post to hold a call center and encourage other members to find some way of supporting and working with other groups.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 25 at 2016 1:14 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:14:40 -0400

Interesting question that should be thought provoking for leaders at all levels of VSOs. I am a strong proponent of belonging to several credible organizations but being active in only one, for me it's The American Legion. I think younger veterans should join VSOs and improve the organizations from within rather than forming new entities. I also believe strongly that many of the newer organizations should consider merging into the largest and most credible VSOs.

Response by Nicci Eisenhauer made Jan 25 at 2019 11:44 PM

Nicci Eisenhauer — Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:44:02 -0500

They cannot merge. Read up on Congressional Charter. They cannot merge without losing their lobbying status and rechartering by Congressional law under US Code Title 36 (although Congress holds no control over the organization. Congress, realizing they have no clue about civic issues, stopped issuing charters in 1992 . A traditional Veterans Service Organization as we know of them are usually a 501c4 (Civic Leagues) and have lobbying capacity. Their local chapters are all separate and independent 501c3 not-for-profit incorporations that are affiliated with the lobbying entity. Another IRS tax designation does exist, 501c19, "Veterans Service Organization", however, it has the very limiting language that 90% of the members must be war veterans, further demonstrating that neither Congress nor whomever designs the social benefit code in detail (the treasury?) has a clue.

Response by CW4 Craig Urban made Jan 27 at 2019 2:43 AM

CW4 Craig Urban — Sun, 27 Jan 2019 02:43:35 -0500

Yes. VFW. American legion
Moaa. Bunch of crap. VA should pay. VA is broken. The draft dodger Trump is no help. One term. Just like the criminal bush.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Mar 12 at 2019 5:37 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:37:25 -0400

As others also mentioned here, I just don't think it'd ever happen, as each has its own traditions and methodology, I've noticed...I've had an instance where, e.g., one time I was at a Navy League function, and there was serious chatting with American Legion reps...however, an overt, direct merging, I just don't think would ever happen...each group, I've seen, has its own bureaucracy, its own operation...I entirely follow why you'd suggest it, or, at least, just raise the possibility, however, on a day-to-day practical level, I just honestly can't perceive such a possibility as being either realistic, or embraced with open arms...as I'd said, cooperative stuff, certainly, however, outright, direct merger, per se, no, honest, I just don't think that'd ever happen, I'm afraid, despite any potential benefits that might conceivably stem from doing so....

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Mar 12 at 2019 5:37 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:37:42 -0400

Of course, that's just my own thought, obviously....

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2019 9:20 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:20:05 -0400

Many more than three, and not so easy to consolidate, and very unlikely they would.
There are 31 VSOs that are Congressionally chartered that are also recognized by
the Department of VA Office of General Counsel for the purpose of preparation, presentation, and prosecution of claims under laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
There are 11 Congressionally chartered that are NOT recognized by the Department of Veterans Affairs for the purpose of preparation, presentation and prosecution of Veteran’s claims only, but represent the interest of American Veterans.
Therevare 3 Veteran organizations NOT congressionally chartered but are officially recognized by the Department of Veterans Affairs for the purpose of preparation, presentation and prosecution of Veteran’s claims only. However, they do represent the interest of American Veterans.
There are 74 Veteran organizations not congressionally chartered or officially recognized by the Department of Veterans Affairs for the purpose of preparation, presentation and prosecution of Veteran’s claims only. However, they do represent the interest of American Veterans. Interesting that IAVA falls into this category.
Source: VA 2017 VSO Directory

Response by SPC Alex Shiflett made Jan 10 at 2022 6:09 PM

SPC Alex Shiflett — Mon, 10 Jan 2022 18:09:41 -0500

They could merge and still be separate.