Veterans face consecutive budget cuts (1 Viewer)

[NCCommish]

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration plans to cut funding for veterans' health care two years from now — even as badly wounded troops returning from Iraq could overwhelm the system.

Bush is using the cuts, critics say, to help fulfill his pledge to balance the budget by 2012.

After an increase sought for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing rapidly — by more than 10 percent in many years — White House budget documents assume consecutive cutbacks in 2009 and 2010 and a freeze thereafter.

The proposed cuts are unrealistic in light of recent VA budget trends — its medical care budget has risen every year for two decades and 83 percent in the six years since Bush took office — sowing suspicion that the White House is simply making them up to make its long-term deficit figures look better.

"Either the administration is willingly proposing massive cuts in VA health care," said Rep. Chet Edwards (news, bio, voting record) of Texas, chairman of the panel overseeing the VA's budget. "Or its promise of a balanced budget by 2012 is based on completely unrealistic assumptions."

Edwards said that a more realistic estimate of veterans costs is $16 billion higher than the Bush estimate for 2012.

In fact, even the White House doesn't seem serious about the numbers. It says the long-term budget numbers don't represent actual administration policies. Similar cuts assumed in earlier budgets have been reversed.

The veterans cuts, said White House budget office spokesman Sean Kevelighan, "don't reflect any policy decisions. We'll revisit them when we do the (future) budgets."

The number of veterans coming into the VA health care system has been rising by about 5 percent a year as the number of people returning from Iraq with illnesses or injuries keep rising. Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans represent almost 5 percent of the VA's patient caseload, and many are returning from battle with grievous injuries requiring costly care, such as traumatic brain injuries.

All told, the VA expects to treat about 5.8 million patients next year, including 263,000 veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The White House budget office, however, assumes that the veterans' medical services budget — up 83 percent since Bush took office and winning a big increase in Bush's proposed 2008 budget — can absorb a 2 percent cut the following year and remain essentially frozen for three years in a row after that.

"It's implausible," Sen. Patty Murray (news, bio, voting record), D-Wash., said of the budget projections.

The White House made virtually identical assumptions last year — a big increase in the first year of the budget and cuts for every year thereafter to veterans medical care. Now, the White House estimate for 2008 is more than $4 billion higher than Bush figured last year.

And the VA has been known to get short-term estimates wrong as well. Two years ago, Congress had to pass an emergency $1.5 billion infusion for veterans health programs for 2005 and added $2.7 billion to Bush's request for 2006. The VA underestimated the number of veterans, including those from Iraq and Afghanistan, who were seeking care, as well as the cost of treatment and long-term care.

The budget for hospital and medical care for veterans is funded for the current year at $35.6 billion, and would rise to $39.6 billion in 2008 under Bush's budget. That's about 9 percent. But the budget faces a cut to $38.8 billion in 2009 and would hover around that level through 2012.

The cuts come even as the number of veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is expected to increase 26 percent next year.

In Bush's proposal to balance the budget by 2012, he's assuming that spending on domestic agency operating budgets will increase by about 1 percent each year.

ArticleDoesn't seem very supportive. Seems like number juggling as well.

 

[bostonfred]

It's not that he's trying to make it look like he balanced the budget. It's that he's trying to hide the real cost of this war, which includes a whole lot of money going out to veterans long after it's over.

 

[NCCommish]

It's not that he's trying to make it look like he balanced the budget. It's that he's trying to hide the real cost of this war, which includes a whole lot of money going out to veterans long after it's over.

Good point.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Shameful. And I don't just say that because my father needs those benefits. It's a disgrace what we put our soldiers through after they come home.

 

[DaVinci]

So 2 years from now their budget will be $3.2 billion higher than it is now. How is that a cut?

 

[The Commish]

IMO, this is the last place "cuts" should be made...very disappointing.

 

[NCCommish]

So 2 years from now their budget will be $3.2 billion higher than it is now. How is that a cut?

It doesn't keep pace with current expenditure growth and it doesn't account for the influx of need as more veterans apply for services.

 

[Tecumseh]

That's still not a cut.

 

[DaVinci]

That's still not a cut.

 

[The_Hunchback]

Shameful. And I don't just say that because my father needs those benefits. It's a disgrace what we put our soldiers through after they come home.

This is true even when they aren't going to war.

 

[phillzphan]

bush

obama

 

[Doctor Detroit]

It's not that he's trying to make it look like he balanced the budget. It's that he's trying to hide the real cost of this war, which includes a whole lot of money going out to veterans long after it's over.

Good point.

The American people don't know half the story. Right now they can't move military people to new duty locations which is releasable, and many more examples that I can't comment on that are quite ridiculous in a budgetary sense. This war is beyond the conceptual understanding of over budget and by how far... would surprise even the biggest skeptics. Cutting vets benefits (thanks from disabled vets like me GW ) is always one of the first steps and then one of the last steps in tightening the belts. This is why many military members who were staunch republicans while in, fly over to the other side of the aisle when they separate. Republicans are notorious for cutting vets benefits.

 

[bostonfred]

That's still not a cut.

Why are you arguing over whether this is technically a budget cut or not? I think everyone in this thread will concede it's not. It's a change to the budget that results in a cut in veterans' benefit levels.

 

[The Z Machine]

The American people don't know half the story. Right now they can't move military people to new duty locations which is releasable, and many more examples that I can't comment on that are quite ridiculous in a budgetary sense. This war is beyond the conceptual understanding of over budget and by how far... would surprise even the biggest skeptics. Cutting vets benefits (thanks from disabled vets like me GW ) is always one of the first steps and then one of the last steps in tightening the belts. This is why many military members who were staunch republicans while in, fly over to the other side of the aisle when they separate. Republicans are notorious for cutting vets benefits.

I didn't know you were a disabled vet, DD.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

The American people don't know half the story. Right now they can't move military people to new duty locations which is releasable, and many more examples that I can't comment on that are quite ridiculous in a budgetary sense. This war is beyond the conceptual understanding of over budget and by how far... would surprise even the biggest skeptics. Cutting vets benefits (thanks from disabled vets like me GW ) is always one of the first steps and then one of the last steps in tightening the belts. This is why many military members who were staunch republicans while in, fly over to the other side of the aisle when they separate. Republicans are notorious for cutting vets benefits.

I didn't know you were a disabled vet, DD.

30 percent. Most times I don't feel it but for those 15 to 20 days a year I deserve the stipend.

 

[The Z Machine]

The American people don't know half the story. Right now they can't move military people to new duty locations which is releasable, and many more examples that I can't comment on that are quite ridiculous in a budgetary sense. This war is beyond the conceptual understanding of over budget and by how far... would surprise even the biggest skeptics. Cutting vets benefits (thanks from disabled vets like me GW ) is always one of the first steps and then one of the last steps in tightening the belts. This is why many military members who were staunch republicans while in, fly over to the other side of the aisle when they separate. Republicans are notorious for cutting vets benefits.

I didn't know you were a disabled vet, DD.

30 percent. Most times I don't feel it but for those 15 to 20 days a year I deserve the stipend.

Well, you earned it. Thanks for the service.Now how's that new venture you mentioned a while back?

 

[Bri]

aren't the death benefits for the current war something like anywhere from 250k to a mil per person? Wasn't it just 75k not that long ago?

That seemed like too high of a jump to me so I figure this is the start of them freeing up money to pay those benefits.

 

[Gator Shawn]

aren't the death benefits for the current war something like anywhere from 250k to a mil per person? Wasn't it just 75k not that long ago?That seemed like too high of a jump to me so I figure this is the start of them freeing up money to pay those benefits.

I think it was like 25K when I was in the Marines in 1988.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

The American people don't know half the story. Right now they can't move military people to new duty locations which is releasable, and many more examples that I can't comment on that are quite ridiculous in a budgetary sense. This war is beyond the conceptual understanding of over budget and by how far... would surprise even the biggest skeptics. Cutting vets benefits (thanks from disabled vets like me GW ) is always one of the first steps and then one of the last steps in tightening the belts. This is why many military members who were staunch republicans while in, fly over to the other side of the aisle when they separate. Republicans are notorious for cutting vets benefits.

I didn't know you were a disabled vet, DD.

30 percent. Most times I don't feel it but for those 15 to 20 days a year I deserve the stipend.

Well, you earned it. Thanks for the service.Now how's that new venture you mentioned a while back?

Still working out the details. It's going to be anywhere from very good to great for me as it stands but I'll revisit that topic once we figure everything out. Thanks for asking.

 

[Guest]

WASHINGTON — So far, 1,511 members of the U.S. military have died in Iraq (search) and Afghanistan. The government currently pays a death benefit of $12,000.

That's double what was paid a year ago, but a bipartisan push in Congress is seeking to increase death benefits to $100,000. Several states are also moving to increase death benefits for their National Guard (search) and Reserve forces.

Lawmakers working on the increase say while they can't measure the cost of freedom, the payment for a battlefield death isn't nearly enough.

"You can't value a life. But we know that we can do a lot better than $12,000 for the families of those who have given their lives in our defense," said Sen. Joe Lieberman (search), D-Conn.

Lieberman wants to boost the death benefit to $100,000 and make it retroactive to all U.S. personnel killed in Afghanistan (search) and Iraq. He's joined by Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions.

__________________________

That's an old article (2005). Does anybody know if it passed?

Also, I guess there's a difference between the death benefit (above) and military life insurance. - Which the same article said was $250K then, but they wanted to up it to $400K.

Anybody have more current info?

 

[Doovz]

WASHINGTON — So far, 1,511 members of the U.S. military have died in Iraq (search) and Afghanistan. The government currently pays a death benefit of $12,000.That's double what was paid a year ago, but a bipartisan push in Congress is seeking to increase death benefits to $100,000. Several states are also moving to increase death benefits for their National Guard (search) and Reserve forces.Lawmakers working on the increase say while they can't measure the cost of freedom, the payment for a battlefield death isn't nearly enough."You can't value a life. But we know that we can do a lot better than $12,000 for the families of those who have given their lives in our defense," said Sen. Joe Lieberman (search), D-Conn.Lieberman wants to boost the death benefit to $100,000 and make it retroactive to all U.S. personnel killed in Afghanistan (search) and Iraq. He's joined by Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions.__________________________That's an old article (2005). Does anybody know if it passed?Also, I guess there's a difference between the death benefit (above) and military life insurance. - Which the same article said was $250K then, but they wanted to up it to $400K.Anybody have more current info?

Wow. $12,000? Unreal. I never thought it would be that low. I work for VA in Canada and they provide $250,000 death benefit and military life insurance also gives the same. The children also get their education paid for until they reach 25 and get a monthly stipend while in school so that they don't have to work. The spouse gets a monthly pension and also has the option of upgrading her education if she is under employed or doesn't have skills. It still isn't worth your life but at least you know that your wife and children will be looked after very well. However our VA is nowhere near as large a department as the U.S. Don't know if this fact is true or not but I heard that the VA was the second largest government department. We are experiencing alot of casualties and injuries in Afghanistan but we have no where near the amount of troops overseas as the U.S.

 

[NCCommish]

It's not that he's trying to make it look like he balanced the budget. It's that he's trying to hide the real cost of this war, which includes a whole lot of money going out to veterans long after it's over.

Good point.

The American people don't know half the story. Right now they can't move military people to new duty locations which is releasable, and many more examples that I can't comment on that are quite ridiculous in a budgetary sense. This war is beyond the conceptual understanding of over budget and by how far... would surprise even the biggest skeptics. Cutting vets benefits (thanks from disabled vets like me GW ) is always one of the first steps and then one of the last steps in tightening the belts. This is why many military members who were staunch republicans while in, fly over to the other side of the aisle when they separate. Republicans are notorious for cutting vets benefits.

Over a trillion without looking back is my guess.

 

[SofaKings]

Shameful. And I don't just say that because my father needs those benefits. It's a disgrace what we put our soldiers through after they come home.

Doesn't matter who is President either.

 

[NCCommish]

Shameful. And I don't just say that because my father needs those benefits. It's a disgrace what we put our soldiers through after they come home.

Doesn't matter who is President either.

True

 

[Gator Shawn]

aren't the death benefits for the current war something like anywhere from 250k to a mil per person? Wasn't it just 75k not that long ago?That seemed like too high of a jump to me so I figure this is the start of them freeing up money to pay those benefits.

I think it was like 25K when I was in the Marines in 1988.

Actually $5000 sounds more like it based on the article I read earlier.

 

[Christo]

It's not that he's trying to make it look like he balanced the budget. It's that he's trying to hide the real cost of this war, which includes a whole lot of money going out to veterans long after it's over.

Good point.

How can that be the explanation? The article states that:

All told, the VA expects to treat about 5.8 million patients next year, including 263,000 veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan

That's just 5%.Just like the rest of the population, the majority of the veterans who seek medical care from the VA do so later in life. To get an idea of how this cut actually affects veterans, it would be necessary to examine how many from WWII and Korea are expected to be passing away in the next few years.

 

[Bri]

aren't the death benefits for the current war something like anywhere from 250k to a mil per person? Wasn't it just 75k not that long ago?

That seemed like too high of a jump to me so I figure this is the start of them freeing up money to pay those benefits.

I think it was like 25K when I was in the Marines in 1988.

Actually $5000 sounds more like it based on the article I read earlier.

the 250k I saw in a thread here. I googled and didn't find the original article but herehttp://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_299101.html

A tax-free "death gratuity," now $12,420, would grow to $100,000. The government would also pay for $150,000 in life insurance for troops. Veterans groups and many in Congress have been pushing for such increases.

I'm pretty sure that was approved thru Congress, again thread here.I may have confused death benefit vs military life insurance when I suppose I meant the sum of the two.

Hope that clears it up

 

[bueno]

So 2 years from now their budget will be $3.2 billion higher than it is now. How is that a cut?

It doesn't keep pace with current expenditure growth and it doesn't account for the influx of need as more veterans apply for services.

Are the total number of vets seved increasing? After all, a lot of WWII and Korean vets are dying. Don't know how it ll balances out. It would suck if the actual services veterans get are being cut - wouldn't be in favor of that at all. Not that I'd take Patty's word for it.

 

[NCCommish]

So 2 years from now their budget will be $3.2 billion higher than it is now. How is that a cut?

It doesn't keep pace with current expenditure growth and it doesn't account for the influx of need as more veterans apply for services.

Are the total number of vets seved increasing? After all, a lot of WWII and Korean vets are dying. Don't know how it ll balances out. It would suck if the actual services veterans get are being cut - wouldn't be in favor of that at all. Not that I'd take Patty's word for it.

Not sure who Patty is but most of the WW2 types are already out of the system and costs are still increasing.

 

[bueno]

So 2 years from now their budget will be $3.2 billion higher than it is now. How is that a cut?

It doesn't keep pace with current expenditure growth and it doesn't account for the influx of need as more veterans apply for services.

Are the total number of vets seved increasing? After all, a lot of WWII and Korean vets are dying. Don't know how it ll balances out. It would suck if the actual services veterans get are being cut - wouldn't be in favor of that at all. Not that I'd take Patty's word for it.

Not sure who Patty is but most of the WW2 types are already out of the system and costs are still increasing.

Patty Murray (quoted in the article). I wouldn't expect her to be able to balance a checkbook, and she's our better Senator.

 

[Christo]

So 2 years from now their budget will be $3.2 billion higher than it is now. How is that a cut?

It doesn't keep pace with current expenditure growth and it doesn't account for the influx of need as more veterans apply for services.

Are the total number of vets seved increasing? After all, a lot of WWII and Korean vets are dying. Don't know how it ll balances out. It would suck if the actual services veterans get are being cut - wouldn't be in favor of that at all. Not that I'd take Patty's word for it.

Not sure who Patty is but most of the WW2 types are already out of the system and costs are still increasing.

The number of veterans breaks down as follows:20-24 315,917

25-29 669,806

30-34 1,007,514

35-39 1,331,885

40-44 1,731,818

45-49 1,906,312

50-54 2,171,604

55-59 3,571,932

60-64 2,552,834

65-69 2,233,818

70-74 2,459,833

75-79 2,232,754

80-84 1,707,657

85-89 715,918

90+ 170,114

Link

Looks like the biggest numbers come from Vietnam. But there are still a lot more veterans from WWII and Korea alive than there are going to be from Iraq.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I don't know if anyone has seen this but I thought it was so sad and awful it deserved attention.

I put it in this thread because obviously cuts have been going on for a while, pre-Obama... but I take it they have continued.

It makes me fairly upset also that Obama did run on supporting veterans in 2008 and I think that appealed to a lot of voters looking for some sort of good faith from Obama that he did support the military or the vets who have given so much to us.

The chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee on Thursday pledged to convene a hearing on allegations that excessive wait times at a Phoenix VA facility led to the deaths of 40 veterans.

Thousands of veterans have been kept waiting for care, according to a story first reported in the Arizona Republic, and later on CNN, which also said that VA workers in the Phoenix office used two sets of records to keep the long wait times off the official books.

"I am troubled when I hear any veteran may have received substandard care from the VA," said the committee chairman, Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent. "I take these allegations very seriously."

The VA's inspector general in Washington has sent a team to investigate, the senator said, adding that he would hold his hearing after the work is complete.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-va-phoenix-veterans-death-20140424,0,226311.story#ixzz30PMhMoA0

 

[The Commish]

In all honesty....our government and the people who elected them should be ashamed.

 

[NCCommish]

I don't know if anyone has seen this but I thought it was so sad and awful it deserved attention.

I put it in this thread because obviously cuts have been going on for a while, pre-Obama... but I take it they have continued.

It makes me fairly upset also that Obama did run on supporting veterans in 2008 and I think that appealed to a lot of voters looking for some sort of good faith from Obama that he did support the military or the vets who have given so much to us.

The chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee on Thursday pledged to convene a hearing on allegations that excessive wait times at a Phoenix VA facility led to the deaths of 40 veterans.

Thousands of veterans have been kept waiting for care, according to a story first reported in the Arizona Republic, and later on CNN, which also said that VA workers in the Phoenix office used two sets of records to keep the long wait times off the official books.

"I am troubled when I hear any veteran may have received substandard care from the VA," said the committee chairman, Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent. "I take these allegations very seriously."

The VA's inspector general in Washington has sent a team to investigate, the senator said, adding that he would hold his hearing after the work is complete.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-va-phoenix-veterans-death-20140424,0,226311.story#ixzz30PMhMoA0

To be fair Obama walked into a mess left by the War President. With that said he hasn't done nearly enough to clear the backlog. We promise these guys we will support them then we make it as hard as possible. It's infuriating.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I think in general Obama has done a good job with the VA which was horribly underfunded and administered prior to OEF/OIF. Shinseki is exactly the right guy to run the department too, so I really hope this isn't going to get him canned. I mean you are talking about a government organization that was very Soviet-like in it's approach prior to 2001, because no one cared about it. I think they are starting to turn the corner but I'm actually surprised more of the Phoenix stories don't exist, they still are undermanned and underfunded for what they are tasked to do.

 

[NCCommish]

I think in general Obama has done a good job with the VA which was horribly underfunded and administered prior to OEF/OIF. Shinseki is exactly the right guy to run the department too, so I really hope this isn't going to get him canned. I mean you are talking about a government organization that was very Soviet-like in it's approach prior to 2001, because no one cared about it. I think they are starting to turn the corner but I'm actually surprised more of the Phoenix stories don't exist, they still are undermanned and underfunded for what they are tasked to do.

Would absolutely support a ton more funding for this.

 

[The Commish]

I think in general Obama has done a good job with the VA which was horribly underfunded and administered prior to OEF/OIF. Shinseki is exactly the right guy to run the department too, so I really hope this isn't going to get him canned. I mean you are talking about a government organization that was very Soviet-like in it's approach prior to 2001, because no one cared about it. I think they are starting to turn the corner but I'm actually surprised more of the Phoenix stories don't exist, they still are undermanned and underfunded for what they are tasked to do.

Would absolutely support a ton more funding for this.

We should be demanding it IMO.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

More hearings on the way:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/08/politics/va-shinseki/index.html

The House Veterans Affairs Committee voted Thursday to subpoena Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki in the wake of accusations that his department had deadly delays in health care at some of its hospitals.

The Shinseki subpoena will cover e-mails that allegedly discussed the destruction of a secret list, first reported by CNN, of veterans waiting for care at a Phoenix VA hospital.

The panel agreed to issue the subpoena in a voice vote Thursday morning.

Shinseki told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that he would not resign over allegations that U.S. veterans died awaiting care at VA hospitals across the country.

"I serve at the pleasure of the president," Shinseki told the newspaper when asked whether he would step down. "I signed on to make some changes. I have work to do."

At Tuesday's White House daily briefing, press secretary Jay Carney said that President Obama takes seriously the allegations that veterans died waiting for care at the Phoenix VA hospital, Carney said. He repeated that the VA's inspector general is conducting an independent investigation into the allegations.

"The President remains confident in Secretary Shinseki's ability to lead the department and take appropriate action," Carney said, repeating the White House response this week to two veterans groups' calls for Shinseki's ouster.

On Monday the American Legion, the nation's largest veteran organization, and another veterans group, Concerned Veterans for America, called for Shinseki's resignation.

Those demands followed months of CNN exclusive reporting about U.S. veterans who have died while they waited for treatment at VA hospitals around the country.

Phoenix VA officials deny secret wait list; doctors say they're lying

The national commander of the American Legion said the group's call for Shinseki's ouster is a very serious gesture.

"It's not something we do lightly. But we do so today because it is our responsibility as advocate for the men and women who have worn this nation's uniform," said Daniel M. Dellinger.

Pete Hegseth, CEO of the Concerned Veterans of America, offered a statement: "We're proud to stand with The American Legion as they take this courageous and historic stand. As America's largest veterans organization, their moral authority on this issue is unimpeachable. We applaud their demands for accountability at the very top of the Department of Veterans Affairs."

 

[Smack Tripper]

If you can't afford to take care of the veterans, stop making veterans and bring em home.

Reprehensible.

We should have a measure where veterans share the exact same medical coverage as congress and senate and those emeritus of those branches.

And it really shouldn't be a discussion.

 

[timschochet]

Just heard about this again this morning. Frankly, I don't care which party is to blame. As far as I'm concerned, they're all to blame. It's shameful.

If I were in charge, veterans would be able to enter any hospital in the country and receive immediate full medical treatment, free of charge, billed to the government.

 

[NCCommish]

Just heard about this again this morning. Frankly, I don't care which party is to blame. As far as I'm concerned, they're all to blame. It's shameful.

If I were in charge, veterans would be able to enter any hospital in the country and receive immediate full medical treatment, free of charge, billed to the government.

Single payer for everyone and it's also solved.

 

[Slapdash]

Just heard about this again this morning. Frankly, I don't care which party is to blame. As far as I'm concerned, they're all to blame. It's shameful.

If I were in charge, veterans would be able to enter any hospital in the country and receive immediate full medical treatment, free of charge, billed to the government.

Single payer for everyone and it's also solved.

You've got my vote

 

[NCCommish]

Just heard about this again this morning. Frankly, I don't care which party is to blame. As far as I'm concerned, they're all to blame. It's shameful.

If I were in charge, veterans would be able to enter any hospital in the country and receive immediate full medical treatment, free of charge, billed to the government.

Single payer for everyone and it's also solved.

You've got my vote

Now if I just had a super pac. Chet probably has a couple. Maybe he'd loan me one?

 

[timschochet]

Not sure why this isn't getting more discussion. Unlike the Benghazi nonsense, this appears to be a real cover up and scandal. Whoever is responsible for lying about this deserves to go to jail.

 

[NCCommish]

Not sure why this isn't getting more discussion. Unlike the Benghazi nonsense, this appears to be a real cover up and scandal. Whoever is responsible for lying about this deserves to go to jail.

There is no cover up really. The VA has been a mess for a long time anybody paying attention for the last couple of decades knows that. It is a national embarrassment and scandalous in it's treatment of our soldiers but it isn't Watergate.

 

[timschochet]

Not sure why this isn't getting more discussion. Unlike the Benghazi nonsense, this appears to be a real cover up and scandal. Whoever is responsible for lying about this deserves to go to jail.

There is no cover up really. The VA has been a mess for a long time anybody paying attention for the last couple of decades knows that. It is a national embarrassment and scandalous in it's treatment of our soldiers but it isn't Watergate.

According to what I just saw on the news, records were falsified.

 

[NCCommish]

Not sure why this isn't getting more discussion. Unlike the Benghazi nonsense, this appears to be a real cover up and scandal. Whoever is responsible for lying about this deserves to go to jail.

There is no cover up really. The VA has been a mess for a long time anybody paying attention for the last couple of decades knows that. It is a national embarrassment and scandalous in it's treatment of our soldiers but it isn't Watergate.

According to what I just saw on the news, records were falsified.

The VA is a huge bureaucracy. This IG report was commissioned by Shinseki IIRC. That doesn't sounds like a cover up that sounds like an investigation. it seems like this has been standard practice for a while for these clinics that couldn't match the guidelines set at the top. So if they can pin any lawbreaking on anyone rock on and send them to jail. But those aren't criminal laws they broke.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I completely disagree with the American Legion on Shinseki and have written them to tell them as much. He is honestly the first VA Secretary that I have been associated with who actually cares, and isn't there as some sort of crony promotion government is known for at that level. He knows what vet needs, he understands the problems, and he's done his best to fix what ails the department. Do you know how many times I've seen this guy on CSPAN begging congressional committees for help with the VA? It seems like it's at least once a week.

 

[NCCommish]

I completely disagree with the American Legion on Shinseki and have written them to tell them as much. He is honestly the first VA Secretary that I have been associated with who actually cares, and isn't there as some sort of crony promotion government is known for at that level. He knows what vet needs, he understands the problems, and he's done his best to fix what ails the department. Do you know how many times I've seen this guy on CSPAN begging congressional committees for help with the VA? It seems like it's at least once a week.

I really like Shinseki. I think he cares and I think he is trying. But man he inherited one hell of a mess.

 

[The Commish]

I completely disagree with the American Legion on Shinseki and have written them to tell them as much. He is honestly the first VA Secretary that I have been associated with who actually cares, and isn't there as some sort of crony promotion government is known for at that level. He knows what vet needs, he understands the problems, and he's done his best to fix what ails the department. Do you know how many times I've seen this guy on CSPAN begging congressional committees for help with the VA? It seems like it's at least once a week.

I really like Shinseki. I think he cares and I think he is trying. But man he inherited one hell of a mess.