Army admits it failed injured

[Bullypulpit]

Let me present you with this article from 2005 in "<a href=http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0501.longman.html><i>Washington Monthly</i></a>".

Here's a quote:

<blockquote>Yet here's a curious fact that few conservatives or liberals know. Who do you think receives higher-quality health care. Medicare patients who are free to pick their own doctors and specialists? Or aging veterans stuck in those presumably filthy VA hospitals with their antiquated equipment, uncaring administrators, and incompetent staff? An answer came in 2003, when the prestigious <i>New England Journal of Medicine</i> published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. <i>The Annals of Internal Medicine</i> recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.</blockquote>

I know docs who did internships in VA hospitals in the 80's and 90's. They said then that they were truly horrific, and got as far away from them as they could as soon as they could. Some more current MD's say that their experiences at VA facilities were good.

The sad fact is, though, that with the number of injured veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, the system will be overloaded if steps aren't taken now to ensure adequate funding for the VA. If that fails to happen, things could likely go back to the bad old days for the VA as staff and facilities are overwhelmed by the need.

But guess what? Instead of increasing funding for VA services The Bush Administration <a href=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/303415_vetshealth13.html>anticipates cuts to VA funding in 2009 and 2010</a>, with a freeze on spending thereafter. This with the average VA caseload increasing about 5&#37; per year since 2000, and sure to increase dramatically as more and more critically wounded vets, requiring specialized and long term care return from Iraq. The VA is already seeing more than 200,000 veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan on an annual basis. Any escalation in Iraq and the surrounding region is sure to increase that number beyond the systems capacity to cope.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Other companies cannot operate on the scale this company does...that is one of the problems.

Can you guess why the military does not do it themselves? I'll give you a hint: it has to do with downsizing and budget cuts.

Or, more likely, being overstretched by CHimpy McPresident's foreign adventurism in Iraq. Then too, with Cheney's ties to Haliburton and its subsidiaries awarding them no-bid contracts was a no brainer.

 

[red states rule]

It seems dems know about these issues for awhile now - why did they not do something then?

Oh, they did not see any political gaines. Now they are blaming other

So typical of the gutless left


What follows is a partial transcript posted at NewsMax. Frankly, it’s too much fun to interrupt with commentary. As such, roll the tape:

Imus: Have you been aware, even since 1981, of the state of treatment that veterans have been receiving throughout the Veterans Administration hospitals?

Schumer: Yes, it’s gotten much worse in the last seven or eight years because the funding was just cut, cut, cut, cut, cut. I get stories all the time of veterans wounded in Iraq, they get good treatment over in Iraq . . . The Veterans Administration has just been decimated in terms of funding and it’s unbelievable because . . . we ask these people to serve us and in the DoD part, at least in Iraq, and initially when they are wounded from all reports they are treated well, after that they are just sort of forgotten about and the VA is just in terrible shape, terrible shape . . . It’s a little like FEMA with Katrina. They put the wrong people in charge. They don’t really care.

Imus: Senator Schumer, you’re not suggesting to me that this is something that just happened under the Bush administration. This has been going on since Korea, since the second world war.

Schumer: It’s been going on for a while, but what happened with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is that the system got completely overloaded and it really broke down.

Imus: We’ve known for years, certainly since 1981, that the care and the way that these veterans have been treated to a large degree, not because it’s the people’s fault — most of them, the doctors and nurses particularly at the Veterans Administration — but for a variety of reasons, in many cases, their treatment and care has been woefully inadequate.

The bureaucratic red tape has been a nightmare for a lot of these people, and that’s been going on for years, and my question is why haven’t any of you ever done anything about it?

Schumer: Well, we’ve tried. I’ve been fighting since I got to the Senate for full funding for the veterans, and we didn’t do any oversight. That’s the real problem here . . . I’ll tell you one other thing that will happen. We’ll get full funding for the VA this year, for the first time. We did actually, to show you a little bit that this isn’t just catching up to the crisis, we did a budget in early January . . .

Imus: Let me interrupt you for a second, but this is nonsense, Senator Schumer. I want to be respectful, but you can’t possibly be serious and suggest — I mean I’m not a fool. You can’t suggest to me that because the Democrats are now in power that something is going to be done about Walter Reed and about the mess in the Veterans Administration and all of this, and that if the Democrats hadn’t taken control of Congress that nothing would have been done. That’s preposterous; of course it would have.

Schumer: Well, something would have been done if the story would have gotten out . . .

Imus: Here’s another question. Have you ever been over to Walter Reed?

Schumer: Ahh, not in a while, no.

Imus: How long has it been since you’ve been over there?

Schumer: Oh, before Iraq.

Imus: So, before Iraq since you’ve been over to see the soldiers. So, we have elected you — first in the Congress and now in the Senate — and you’ve got a bill now to do something we’ll get to in a minute; but you haven’t even been to Walter Reed Hospital.

Schumer: No, no, no. But I have visited regularly the veterans' hospitals throughout my state. That’s where I have focused on . . .

Imus: Well, you must have seen the state of affairs there . . .

Schumer: I did.

Imus: Well why didn’t you do something about it?

Schumer: We did . . . I did . . . I tried, I have been pushing . . .

Imus: Well nothing happened, Senator.

Schumer: No, nothing happened, I agree with you. It’s a shame. It’s a disgrace.

Imus: Did you vote to authorize the president to go to war in Iraq?

Schumer: Yes.

Imus: Good . . . So why wouldn’t you, once you voted for the president to go to war in Iraq, why wouldn’t you go over to Walter Reed — since the Iraq war has begun its been going on longer than World War II — to see the consequence of your vote. They are over there with no arms and legs, Senator.

Schumer: I did see the consequence throughout my state. I went to many, many veterans’ hospitals there. Did I visit every veterans' hospital? No, but I spent a lot of time; I mean, three weeks before this crisis happened, I was throughout the cities of my state meeting with guardsmen and reservists about the bad benefits they got in terms of health care.

Imus: But you need to go see the kids with no arms and legs . . .

Schumer: I am going to go to Walter Reed. You know, probably I should have gone there . . .

Imus: Without question, you should have . . .

Schumer: . . . but I did visit many veterans’ hospitals.

Imus: Was your vote originally to authorize the president to go to war in Iraq, in retrospect, was that a mistake on your part?

Schumer: Well, you know we talked about this a few times when I was on the show. Looking in retrospect, Iraq has been a total mess.

I do always believe, you know, when the nation is attacked you try to give the chief executive some latitude, a little bit of the benefit of the doubt, but I’ll never give this guy the benefit of the doubt again. We are putting — I don’t know if you saw the papers this morning — we’re putting together a plan, hopefully we’ll get some bipartisan support, that we changed the mission and the vast majority of troops are out by March 31, 2008.

Schumer: No, we were not attacked by Iraq.

Schumer: Well, again, I would say that I do believe in a strong chief executive in foreign policy. Would I, knowing what I know now, have done the same thing I did then? Obviously not.

Imus: Well, the first thing you’ve got to do is find time to go over to Walter Reed . . . That’s outrageous.

Schumer: I’ve already tried to set up time to do that. You’re right. Look, I don’t want to argue with you here. I see these pictures, I’ve talked to the families. I talk to the families in my state. It wrenches your heart out. Fine people. And, you know, so many.

With so much of the fighting being done by guardsmen and reservists — they are often family men and women with young children — our job is to care for them. Our job is to care for them. The nation has let them down, and hopefully that won’t happen again.

Imus: We elect you people to do this and none of you have been truthful with us, and none of you have done your job. In your case, you haven’t even been over there. I mean, Senator McCain apologized yesterday for not knowing about it. I, by the way, don’t exclude myself from all of this, because I’ve been to Walter Reed and I’ve raised tens of millions of dollars to build that new Center for the Intrepid down in San Antonio, and I didn’t ask any questions either, but I wasn’t elected by anybody.

Schumer: We should always be asking questions about as many, many of these issues as we can, and you’re right. It’s a national disgrace. I feel bad, I think everybody feels bad. We should — no question about it. The way to channel that is to make sure that in the future it changes . . .

Absolutely marvelous. What’s the likelihood of any Democrat being so grilled on the Sunday talk shows tomorrow?

I'm not holding my breath.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11332

 

[CSM]

Or, more likely, being overstretched by CHimpy McPresident's foreign adventurism in Iraq. Then too, with Cheney's ties to Haliburton and its subsidiaries awarding them no-bid contracts was a no brainer.

Nice try but you know darn well that when the Navy has to do with less ships, the Air Force has to do with less cargo aircraft and the Army/Marines have to do with less trucks, the locistics train gets swamped very quickly. It has been that way for decades with such cuts being fostered mostly by Dems.

Can you name any companies other than Halburton that can operate on the scale necessary to support military operations? I did not think so. Yes the government could have put the contract out for bids...do you know how long that process takes...didn't think so. Do you know how long it takes a civilian company to get integrated so they can operate in a military environment (war or no war!)...didn't think so.

Bottom line, it has little to do with Iraq and everything to do with capability.

 

[dilloduck]

It seems dems know about these issues for awhile now - why did they not do something then?

Oh, they did not see any political gaines. Now they are blaming other

So typical of the gutless left


What follows is a partial transcript posted at NewsMax. Frankly, it’s too much fun to interrupt with commentary. As such, roll the tape:

Imus: Have you been aware, even since 1981, of the state of treatment that veterans have been receiving throughout the Veterans Administration hospitals?

Schumer: Yes, it’s gotten much worse in the last seven or eight years because the funding was just cut, cut, cut, cut, cut. I get stories all the time of veterans wounded in Iraq, they get good treatment over in Iraq . . . The Veterans Administration has just been decimated in terms of funding and it’s unbelievable because . . . we ask these people to serve us and in the DoD part, at least in Iraq, and initially when they are wounded from all reports they are treated well, after that they are just sort of forgotten about and the VA is just in terrible shape, terrible shape . . . It’s a little like FEMA with Katrina. They put the wrong people in charge. They don’t really care.

Imus: Senator Schumer, you’re not suggesting to me that this is something that just happened under the Bush administration. This has been going on since Korea, since the second world war.

Schumer: It’s been going on for a while, but what happened with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is that the system got completely overloaded and it really broke down.

Imus: We’ve known for years, certainly since 1981, that the care and the way that these veterans have been treated to a large degree, not because it’s the people’s fault — most of them, the doctors and nurses particularly at the Veterans Administration — but for a variety of reasons, in many cases, their treatment and care has been woefully inadequate.

The bureaucratic red tape has been a nightmare for a lot of these people, and that’s been going on for years, and my question is why haven’t any of you ever done anything about it?

Schumer: Well, we’ve tried. I’ve been fighting since I got to the Senate for full funding for the veterans, and we didn’t do any oversight. That’s the real problem here . . . I’ll tell you one other thing that will happen. We’ll get full funding for the VA this year, for the first time. We did actually, to show you a little bit that this isn’t just catching up to the crisis, we did a budget in early January . . .

Imus: Let me interrupt you for a second, but this is nonsense, Senator Schumer. I want to be respectful, but you can’t possibly be serious and suggest — I mean I’m not a fool. You can’t suggest to me that because the Democrats are now in power that something is going to be done about Walter Reed and about the mess in the Veterans Administration and all of this, and that if the Democrats hadn’t taken control of Congress that nothing would have been done. That’s preposterous; of course it would have.

Schumer: Well, something would have been done if the story would have gotten out . . .

Imus: Here’s another question. Have you ever been over to Walter Reed?

Schumer: Ahh, not in a while, no.

Imus: How long has it been since you’ve been over there?

Schumer: Oh, before Iraq.

Imus: So, before Iraq since you’ve been over to see the soldiers. So, we have elected you — first in the Congress and now in the Senate — and you’ve got a bill now to do something we’ll get to in a minute; but you haven’t even been to Walter Reed Hospital.

Schumer: No, no, no. But I have visited regularly the veterans' hospitals throughout my state. That’s where I have focused on . . .

Imus: Well, you must have seen the state of affairs there . . .

Schumer: I did.

Imus: Well why didn’t you do something about it?

Schumer: We did . . . I did . . . I tried, I have been pushing . . .

Imus: Well nothing happened, Senator.

Schumer: No, nothing happened, I agree with you. It’s a shame. It’s a disgrace.

Imus: Did you vote to authorize the president to go to war in Iraq?

Schumer: Yes.

Imus: Good . . . So why wouldn’t you, once you voted for the president to go to war in Iraq, why wouldn’t you go over to Walter Reed — since the Iraq war has begun its been going on longer than World War II — to see the consequence of your vote. They are over there with no arms and legs, Senator.

Schumer: I did see the consequence throughout my state. I went to many, many veterans’ hospitals there. Did I visit every veterans' hospital? No, but I spent a lot of time; I mean, three weeks before this crisis happened, I was throughout the cities of my state meeting with guardsmen and reservists about the bad benefits they got in terms of health care.

Imus: But you need to go see the kids with no arms and legs . . .

Schumer: I am going to go to Walter Reed. You know, probably I should have gone there . . .

Imus: Without question, you should have . . .

Schumer: . . . but I did visit many veterans’ hospitals.

Imus: Was your vote originally to authorize the president to go to war in Iraq, in retrospect, was that a mistake on your part?

Schumer: Well, you know we talked about this a few times when I was on the show. Looking in retrospect, Iraq has been a total mess.

I do always believe, you know, when the nation is attacked you try to give the chief executive some latitude, a little bit of the benefit of the doubt, but I’ll never give this guy the benefit of the doubt again. We are putting — I don’t know if you saw the papers this morning — we’re putting together a plan, hopefully we’ll get some bipartisan support, that we changed the mission and the vast majority of troops are out by March 31, 2008.

Schumer: No, we were not attacked by Iraq.

Schumer: Well, again, I would say that I do believe in a strong chief executive in foreign policy. Would I, knowing what I know now, have done the same thing I did then? Obviously not.

Imus: Well, the first thing you’ve got to do is find time to go over to Walter Reed . . . That’s outrageous.

Schumer: I’ve already tried to set up time to do that. You’re right. Look, I don’t want to argue with you here. I see these pictures, I’ve talked to the families. I talk to the families in my state. It wrenches your heart out. Fine people. And, you know, so many.

With so much of the fighting being done by guardsmen and reservists — they are often family men and women with young children — our job is to care for them. Our job is to care for them. The nation has let them down, and hopefully that won’t happen again.

Imus: We elect you people to do this and none of you have been truthful with us, and none of you have done your job. In your case, you haven’t even been over there. I mean, Senator McCain apologized yesterday for not knowing about it. I, by the way, don’t exclude myself from all of this, because I’ve been to Walter Reed and I’ve raised tens of millions of dollars to build that new Center for the Intrepid down in San Antonio, and I didn’t ask any questions either, but I wasn’t elected by anybody.

Schumer: We should always be asking questions about as many, many of these issues as we can, and you’re right. It’s a national disgrace. I feel bad, I think everybody feels bad. We should — no question about it. The way to channel that is to make sure that in the future it changes . . .

Absolutely marvelous. What’s the likelihood of any Democrat being so grilled on the Sunday talk shows tomorrow?

I'm not holding my breath.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11332

Nice job, Imus !

 

[red states rule]

It is possible even a die hard lib like Imus can stand up to the Bush basheing left and go with what is right

At least the issue is being fixed and yet all libs want to do is keep bellowing about it

It shows libs would rather have issues and not solutions

 

[Gunny]

But the problem here is that they privatized the services. Had about 100 workers doing what about 350 did prior. Not only that, but they gave the contract to the company that wasn't competent to deliver ice to New Orleans after Katrina. Seems kind of butt backwards to me.

I was listening to Gen. Eaton (ret.) speak last night on Bill Maher's show. I think he had it dead on. Just my feeling on the subject.

The services get privatized as the military is forced to cut back on spending. Warfighting capability WILL be funded first. Has to be. That's the primary mission.

Manpower cutbacks that began in the late 80s and continued through the 90s are finally hitting home hard. For the Marines at least, during the 90s, they kept cutting manpower yet increasing optempo. It's like stretching a rubber band too far.

Privatization is one attempted remedy. Pull out the military personnel from support/secondary roles and hire civilians. The civilian numbers are not included in active duty manpower numbers, so the books balance out. And Lord knows, we MUST balance the books, even at the expense of common sense and logic.

 

[red states rule]

The services get privatized as the military is forced to cut back on spending. Warfighting capability WILL be funded first. Has to be. That's the primary mission.

Manpower cutbacks that began in the late 80s and continued through the 90s are finally hitting home hard. For the Marines at least, during the 90s, they kept cutting manpower yet increasing optempo. It's like stretching a rubber band too far.

Privatization is one attempted remedy. Pull out the military personnel from support/secondary roles and hire civilians. The civilian numbers are not included in active duty manpower numbers, so the books balance out. And Lord knows, we MUST balance the books, even at the expense of common sense and logic.

It seems to me, this may be a perfect example of government run healthcare

Is this what the libs want to give America?

 

[Gunny]

It seems to me, this may be a perfect example of government run healthcare

Is this what the libs want to give America?

That's what i said in my first post. It IS a prime example of socialized medicine.

There's got to be a better way than aspiring to medocrity.