Comments (49)

Crust wrote on March 5, 2007 9:08 AM:

As Paul Krugman says in this morning NYT, Salon broke the story 2 years ago:

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/opinion/05krugman.html?hp
http://dir.salon.com/topics/walter_reed/

It just somehow didn't get much traction the first time round.

jerry wrote on March 5, 2007 9:15 AM:

Does this tie in with NPR's reporting that returning troops at some bases were being denied access to mental health care by their officers (with encouragement from above)?

Jan Walker wrote on March 5, 2007 9:27 AM:

I have a friend,who doesn't even make much money, who is giving a veteran from Iraq badly injured in an ied roadside bomb, money so he can feed, house , and clothe his children and wife!!!! How messed up is that!!! the guy is so badly injured he may not be able to work for along time, if ever. That is so wrong...instead of putting more money in accomplishing nothing in the Middle East, we should put it towards taking care of our young men who have come home in terrible straits!!!

suprised? wrote on March 5, 2007 9:36 AM:

That must have been when Salon did "original reporting" on a regular basis. These days it does mostly fluff and the occasional bit of journalism. Too bad.

The VA has been in sorry shape for a long time. In the 80's I knew a nurse with a coke/meth problem who'd been fired several times and finally wound up at a VA facility as a last resort. She couldn't stand the horror of it, even by her standards. She couldn't take the stress of overwhelming patients needs, lack of resources, and backlog, compared with other nursing work. It was enough to get her to kick the habit to work someplace else, so at least something came of it.

I'm sure anyone could do a search for stories of VA troubles going back decades. Not that it's any excuse, especially since the decline seems to have accelerated rapidly since Iraq. And the recent news of privatization, the email about going from a staff of 300 down to 50, with a former Halliburton exec at the helm... geeze.

At this point these stories are so familiar, it's almost cliche, like some kinda Mad-Lib book, catastrophe edition. Instead of nouns, verbs and adjectives, it's government agencies or entire metropolitan regions, types of catastrophe, and Bush cronies. Or maybe it's like catastrophe bingo. Pick your disaster components at random, turn on the news, and wait for your scenario to be called out.

Heckuva job.

Crust wrote on March 5, 2007 9:47 AM:

To "surprised?" re Salon and fluff: Well, Glenn Greenwald blogs there daily and he is always well worth reading.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/index.html?source=refresh

Fred Roberts wrote on March 5, 2007 9:49 AM:

As a longtime physician's assistant at a VA medical center, I'm well aware of the shortcomings and the undeniable advantages of VA services. But let's keep things straight: neither Ft Bragg, Ft Campbell, Ft Dix, Ft Irwin, nor Walter Reed come under the VA. They're all DOD, Department of the Army

Crust wrote on March 5, 2007 9:54 AM:

Paul, note that Fred Roberts has flagged an important correction: You have two references to "VA" (Veteran Affairs), which is not what we're talking about here. We're talking about DoD. (Indeed, despite being shortchanged under Bush, the VA is still often described as a model of efficiently run health care.)

not suprised anymore wrote on March 5, 2007 9:59 AM:

Greenwald is good.. Conason is so/so, having (increasingly rare) moments of insight. Most of what he writes is filler these days.

The rest? Unapologetic filler and click generators. The contributing writers are mostly awful (Debra Dickerson!) and even the editors are rarely coherent or insightful. Speaking of potboilers and jokes: Broadsheet anyone?

Richard L. Adlof wrote on March 5, 2007 10:00 AM:

The folks at http//www.iava.org have been beating this drum for months. I think that we are finally listening to our Vets. There is more than one story about having to check ones self in as suicidal to just get to talk to a shink.

No matter how crappy it is for the enlisted . . . The returning National Guard folks have it worse.

Thank you President Bush . . .

pro choice lib wrote on March 5, 2007 10:00 AM:

The difference is two political parties who do not want to get out of Iraq, looking for a cause to tap dance to. If the war was still popular, these people would be fucked.

blueman1 wrote on March 5, 2007 10:01 AM:

What I find so revolting about this scandal is attitude of some pro administration people. They say, and rightly so, that these wounded vets get the best medical care you can get. That in years past they would not have survived their wounds. That's what I think is so disgusting. It's as if great medical procedures are used to save the soldiers and when they're stable they dump them in the gutter. It's really soul draining.

not suprised wrote on March 5, 2007 10:06 AM:

"But let's keep things straight: neither Ft Bragg, Ft Campbell, Ft Dix, Ft Irwin, nor Walter Reed come under the VA. They're all DOD, Department of the Army"

Good point, but I think the problem, poor care of veterans, is broader than any particular agency. It seems we're good at patching people up and and keeping them alive, but terrible at extended care and services, which isn't exactly surprising considering the ideology of a lot of people and their dislike of government services.

I wouldn't put it past some ideologues to tell a one legged war vet to pull himself up by his bootstrap. There are still tens of thousands of Vietnam vets is horrible shape, many crippled, homeless and psychologically injured, and our society forgot them a long time ago.

With all the ballyhoo conservative Republicans always make of Vietnam and the way 'peaceniks' treated the returning vets, who has been privatizing veteran services and cutting services most regularly?

Old soldier wrote on March 5, 2007 10:12 AM:

It's been 45 years since I was an Army enlisted man and although I was fortunate not to have needed hospital care I recall vividly the scare tactics used on enlisted men to keep their mouths shut about any sort of bad conditions.
I recall, for example, living in WW2 wooden barracks with coal heating systems in such bad shape we nearly wiped out entire platoons with coal gas. I slept on the lawn in my sleeping bag more than once and was treated like some troublmaker. Not exactly comparable to the conditions at Walter Reed and environs, but my point is that this culture of omerta has always been there. One violated it at one's peril.

Diane wrote on March 5, 2007 10:14 AM:

I don't believe they have reached the 'tip of the ice berg' becasue they have not investigated the out patient services of the VA.

northzax wrote on March 5, 2007 10:20 AM:

WHY IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

remember, these people don't believe in government provided healthcare of any sort. Government, to them, is inherently inefficient and unable to provide modern healthcare, so why would they do anything to prove differently?

they don't believe the government can do this, so it becomes self-fufilling, intentionally or not.

not suprised wrote on March 5, 2007 10:21 AM:

"(Indeed, despite being shortchanged under Bush, the VA is still often described as a model of efficiently run health care.)"

Right, and that's an important distinction. It's not the fault of ordinary physicians and nurses, many of whom do heroic work every day, espcially considering the difficulty and tight budget.

And overall the care is an incredibly good value, extremely efficient, just like Medicare as an insurance system is incredibly efficient. It's just the VA system has been under funded for decades.

The sad reality is that people forget about vets once the war is over, and want tax cuts over veteran care. Their medical insurance and service is separate from that of the VA, which it shouldn't be.

Hopefully once we fix our medical insurance to be single payer we can also roll the VA system into that so Vets can't be forgotten and left behind.

I'm against this war, but it's still an outrage that anyone wounded for his/her country isn't getting the best care. I can't imagine the pain someone must feel to be wounded for the nation, maybe crippled, and then just betrayed. Absolutely an outrage and a shame to us all.

Robin Boerner wrote on March 5, 2007 10:34 AM:

Firing the Sec of the Army and two US Army generals last week was a good start.

Hopefully it was only a START. It is time to clean house, remove the rampant incompetence and corruption by the US Army brass that is driven by personal promotion over what is right and honorable.

At a recent Q&A session by troops in Alaska, Peter Pace was asked why under MG Charles Jacoby's watch soldiers couldn't get dental work done to deploy to Iraq. The question came from a full bird Colonel...assuming he couldn't get the answer out of Jacoby himself he had to ask it on telivision. WTF? Why is this guy in charge of anything if he can't even keep a stateside dental clinic up on what it needs to send troops to war?

Oh, that's right, Jacoby successfully buried the Afghanistan Prision Scandal. He is successful in the US Army's eyes.

"What could he do about a lack of dental care in Alaska that snarls attempts to mobilize National Guardsmen who are ready and want to deploy to Iraq but can't because they can't get their teeth fixed? Soldiers have their teeth in good enough shape to last a year without additional care.

Pace didn't have answers to all the questions, and the one about dental care from Col. Mike Bridges, deputy commander of the 207th Infantry Brigade, was one of them. Pace told an aide to make notes and promised to look into the dental care problem when he gets back to Washington."

http://www.adn.com/news/military/iraq/story/8667493p-8559236c.html

blowback wrote on March 5, 2007 10:37 AM:

Since the war in Iraq has been going on for four years and the worsening situation was evident in the first year, although the White House would not admit it, there is no reason that suitable accommodation could have been built over the last three years. The reason this was not done was to provide cover for George W. Bush.

billp wrote on March 5, 2007 10:41 AM:

The administration, and all conservatives, are against people organizing for power. Any group of people are a threat to the oligarchy, including unions and vets. They would rather not have homeland security if it means a union. They would rather let the vets rot, instead of having to acknowledge that there is a general public service that needs to be performed by the people for the people.

Even our soldiers themselves are a threat, so it is much better to use "private" armies, than to have to deal with ordinary people in a group.

BP

Dennis wrote on March 5, 2007 10:50 AM:

How many scandals and how much malfeasance does it take for even the conservatives to say, "enough" to the Bush administration? And for the matter of responsibility and blame for not taking better care of our military personnel and their families, Congress as well?

We have a lousey Congress; always to busy dancing around politics and political advantage to do the job they're supposed to do.

Congressional ethics? What a joke!

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

markg8 wrote on March 5, 2007 10:56 AM:

I take my dad to the VA at Hines VA hospital in suburban Chicago all the time. We've never had the kind of problems they have at DoD medical facilities. They're efficient, kind and if anything being affiliated with a teaching hospital they go overboard on care. He's been treated for cancer, an eye problem, and speech therapy after stroke a few years. Maybe they treat him well because I go with him all the time but we don't have any complaints.

hibiscus wrote on March 5, 2007 11:09 AM:

in 2004, i wrote a couple times, i think it was twice, in the late spring, to john kerry's campaign, suggesting that he should take "support our troops" to its next logical level and say, "i'll fix the VA." no response directly or indirectly. the closest i ~remember~ him getting to it was proposing to expand the ~other~ federal health care system to cover the uninsured.

please folks: the answer to the VA is single-payer. it's all one mess.

Ed Cogburn wrote on March 5, 2007 11:58 AM:

God and the soldior all men adore
In time of trouble or time of war
But when war is over and all wrongs are righted
God is forgotten, the old soldier slighted.

MrATL wrote on March 5, 2007 12:01 PM:

In Atlanta this morning, Conservative talk show host Neal Boortz went on a rant about how Walter Reed was an example of why we need the private sector, not government, in charge of health care.

Timothy Richley wrote on March 5, 2007 12:02 PM:

As a patient of the VA since 1980, I avoided the Detroit VA hospital (Allen Park) and for years went to Dr's who had nothing to do with vthe VA. Then came the turnaround in the 90's the VA opened a new hospital in Detroit(John R) which is great! In 2003 I moved to San Antonio tx and have been getting all my medical care(as has my wife, as I am a 100% disabled vet and my wife can also get medical care) from the Frank Tejeda VA clinic(they now have 3 clinics in San Antonio) and the Audi Murphy VA hospital. While sometimes slow, the overall care has been fantastic!! I have spoken to many vets at the hospital, and we all agree that in the 90's the VA improved over 1000%. The then head of the VA did yeomans work in upgrading the VA. Then came gwb and his repig majority who have been out to cut the VA budget every year. Remember when they had to go back and ask for billions more(only because of the public outcry) and even now the 2008 and beyond budgets from gwb show a huge cut in VA healthcare. The repigs will continue to say that they support the troops, but don't listen to what they say, watch what they do, they have a 6 year record of screwing the vets, just like the lack of money fro active duty medical care, the repigs find all kinds of money to give to the the multicorps, but nothing to the actual troops.

Bill McGuire wrote on March 5, 2007 12:24 PM:

The Veterans Administration, in all its wisdom, began a two signature system a few years ago. The way this worked is, it only took one signature to deny a claim, but it took two signatures to accept a claim. It's difficult to deny that this was a way to deny more medical claims.
Fortunately, one of the Veterans organizations made this public, and it stopped.
This new discovery is not a new situation with the VA or the DOD, and will most likeley continue shortly after public attention shifts elsewhere.

Daver9 wrote on March 5, 2007 12:44 PM:

Casey Stengel once said of his young Mets "Can'[t anyone here play this game?" Funny because it only involved baseball.

But this latest scandal on the health care of wounded veterans, after the mess of Iraq, Katrina, deficits, corporate failures, firings of skilled prosecutors who won convictions for bribes and hookers and contracts, it all makes me ask, is there any Republican, anywhwere in the federal government who can do ANYTHING right? Is there any Republican not wallowing in madness or payoffs?

Susan wrote on March 5, 2007 1:04 PM:

I have two point to make that I don't think have been made yet. 1) It makes sense that our veterans' physical and mental health care needs are being neglected. After all, they are disposable people in the eyes of those who sent them to war in the first place. 2) Our communities need to prepare for an increase in homelessness due to this illegitimate war. The mental health of our service men and women is being neglected to such a degree that I fear the ranks of the homeless will swell in the next decade.

jrcjr wrote on March 5, 2007 1:06 PM:

Mr ATL-- I don't listen to Boortz, but I'd bet he's probably already aware that the private sector took over Walter Reed over a year ago. and says this anyway.

seems to me that this, like most catastrophes under this administration's watch, are not the result of incompetence, but policy. I'd guess boortz likes a private takeover so that there is simply less accountability; not to actually, you know, implement a working policy.

Anonymous wrote on March 5, 2007 1:18 PM:

blueman1 makes a good point. The death to wounded ratio is something like 7.5 wounded for every death. So the number that most people see, the number of deaths, is a much smaller number compared to total casualties that were the experience in past wars. The rate in WWII and Vietnam were something like 3-1.

Then, after the wounded survivors get into the care system, it's found that that system is seriously lacking. No planning or upgrading of facilities and other care needs occured. Inept, incompetent planning for this war has gone well beyond Iraq itself.

cal wrote on March 5, 2007 1:29 PM:

We all knew about the terrible conditions at military medical facilities at least two or three years ago.

It was the subject of many posts on many progressive sites.

Now,finally, most people know because the WAPOST puts the story on page one, years late and after two elections.

IMHO the negligence of the press, until now, is another big important story.

BinGA wrote on March 5, 2007 1:41 PM:

"As a longtime physician's assistant at a VA medical center, I'm well aware of the shortcomings and the undeniable advantages of VA services. But let's keep things straight: neither Ft Bragg, Ft Campbell, Ft Dix, Ft Irwin, nor Walter Reed come under the VA. They're all DOD, Department of the Army

Posted by: Fred Roberts"

Absolutely. The men and women at WRAMC are active duty soldiers. They have to stand formation at 0700. If they tried to leave to get care somewhere else, they'd be AWOL.

The DoD has to provide for them out of DoD budget. WRAMC was slated to be closed in the 2005 base closure recommendations, and a new facility was to be constructed at a cost of $989 million. The republicans wanted this because they needed enabling legislation to build the new facility because they want to outsource/privatize the work. Excellent article about it here: http://www.unbossed.com/index.php?itemid=1358

What they got was $120 million for a private contract for IAP World Services, run by Al Neffgen, a former employee of - you guessed it - Halliburton subsidiary KRB. IAP didn't take over till February, but fully 80% of the staff of 300 had left by then, and IAP replaced the remaining 60 employees with 50 of their own. IAP is run by Cerberus hedge fund, headed by John Snow. Dan Quayle runs one of the international divisions.

The VA needs help, too. But this story is about active duty soldiers.

mike wrote on March 5, 2007 1:44 PM:

I can't believe that Ft. Irwin is being used as a DoD medical facility. I spent two Natnl Gd summer camops at Ft. Irwin. It is a desert training / artillery range facility in the high desert...just a short drive to Death Valley.

Compare that to Letterman Hospital in the San Francisco Persidio. Oh, yeah. That world class facility was closed.

How many other military health facilities were closed ?

Fractal wrote on March 5, 2007 1:45 PM:

As northzax said March 5, 2007 10:20 AM:

"remember, these people don't believe in government provided healthcare of any sort. Government, to them, is inherently inefficient and unable to provide modern healthcare, so why would they do anything to prove differently?"

It's not just Walter Reed, and it's not just the VA health system. The backlog of 400,000 VA benefit claims does not include a similar backlog at the Board of Veterans' Appeals, and both of those backlogs are dwarfed by the 700,000 disability claims pending before the Social Security Administration (SSA).

All of those backlogs are the result of deliberate policy -- delaying disability benefits also delays eligibility for Medicaid and Medicare health benefits. Deliberate policy. In place for more than twenty years. Under Presidents of both parties and under Congresses controlled by both parties. Congress has deliberately disinvested in SSA and VA disability processing staff for a generation.

Fractal wrote on March 5, 2007 1:56 PM:

"The VA needs help, too. But this story is about active duty soldiers.

Posted by: BinGA
Date: March 5, 2007 01:41 PM"

Actually, this story is not about the bureaucratic name on the building, it's about the DISABLED troops. The hearing today spent considerable time discussing active duty troops who suffer traumatic brain injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Both are DISABLING conditions. The DOD hospitals deliberately delay giving troops their disability ratings, without which the troops cannot gain disability discharges. They need their discharges to become "veterans" and to become eligible for VA medical treatment. Or the DOD gives a disability rating, but less than 100%, thus deeply discounting the benefits payable.

It's all deliberate policy to reduce or eliminate financial exposure for permanent total disabilities.

BinGA wrote on March 5, 2007 2:50 PM:

"It's all deliberate policy to reduce or eliminate financial exposure for permanent total disabilities.

Posted by: Fractal"

Fractal, as shameful as it is, that would not surprize me in the least. I expect that you are right. But, I do think it is also about the push to privatize everything they can, so they can get tax money into the hands of the private sector which can then funnel it back into the Republican coffers. After all, the less they have to pay to disabled vets, the more is available for private contractors. My cynicism has grown so much over the past six years, it hurts.

Tom wrote on March 5, 2007 3:23 PM:

So, when is someone either in Congress or in the media going to point out that the horrors of Walter Reed and the rest of the military's failure to care for our wounded troops a failure of the Commander in Chief to protect his troops? You know, the ones he reminds us all the time are "his" because if we criticize him we criticize them?

gonzone wrote on March 5, 2007 3:36 PM:

These conditions put the lie to "support the troops" BS we keep getting from the righties any time Dear Leader gets criticized.

Fred Roberts wrote on March 5, 2007 4:18 PM:

Addressing war veterans on Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney promised that the problems at Walter Reed will be fixed.

"There will be no excuses _ only action," Cheney told a gathering of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. "And the federal bureaucracy will not slow that action down."

Thank God the wounded have SuperDick to look out for them and protect them from bureaucrats!

Thirdexit wrote on March 5, 2007 4:55 PM:

As a vet I am surprised at the socalled problems t VA hospitals and then a whole list of Army not VA hospitals. The VA does a real good jjob with the money they hav

cj wrote on March 5, 2007 5:40 PM:

My father was a service connected veteran from WWII who several years ago died in the VA hospital in Dallas from his service connected disability. He had been married to my mother for 45 years when he died. He had undergone multiple surgeries to treat his service connected disability. In all of his 45 years of married life, he had never removed his wedding ring, not even for his surgeries. My mother, brother and I were all with my father when he died. Within 30 minutes of his death someone at the VA Hospital in Dallas stole his wedding ring off of his finger. The ring he had never removed in 45 years of combat, marriage, work, multiple hospitalizations, and surgeries. When his body was picked up by the funeral home there was no ring. It was a very small gold band—probably not worth very much, but it did have some distinctive markings on it. At the time my husband and I were newly married, in fact I had come back from my honeymoon early to be with my father in his last hours. My husband and I spent the next day and a half going from pawn shop to pawn shop in the area close to the VA and finally found his ring—paid $70 for it and got it to the funeral home before my mother ever knew it was stolen. When she viewed his body, the first thing she looked for was his wedding ring.

I reported the theft to the administrator of the VA Hospital, he could not care less. Even though I wanted to make a big deal out of it, I did not because I did not want my mother to find out.
Not only was my father a veteran, but for years I had been a volunteer at the VA and spent 2000+ hours giving of my time to the sick and injured and later I was a student nurse at that facility.

The point is the VA has sucked for our veterans for years. I have other stories to tell, but in an attempt to be brief I will not.

a.t. wrote on March 5, 2007 6:32 PM:

Please clarify if the facilities in question are all Army facilities or do the Marines have similar issues too?

Fractal wrote on March 5, 2007 7:50 PM:

The Marines are a component of the U.S. Navy, so they are eligible for treatment at Navy hospitals, including Bethesda Naval Hospital.

Note, in addition, all patients at Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) will supposedly be relocated to Bethesda Naval Hospital if and when WRAMC is actually closed. See above and in other threads for mention that the Base Realignment & Closing Commission (BRAC) officially closed WRAMC effective in a few years.

Note, further, all members of Congress who request it or need it are entitled to treatment at Bethesda Naval Hospital, and they often go there, but I have not heard or seen any coverage reporting that Senators or Representatives ask for treatment at WRAMC.

angrydisabledvietnamvet wrote on March 5, 2007 7:56 PM:

Yes, it seems that the "commander in chief" (oh, how he loves to bandy that title around...for a jerk who failed to do his duty and serve in Vietnam), and "war president" (he likes that one, also, kinda makes him feel like he is the company of REAL men) is all too willing to send "his" troops to Iraq, Afghanistan and who knows where next time he gets into one of his crazier states of mind,where they wind up getting and killed. But then, he could give a damn? Well, in the military, in case Bush doesn't know, you take care of the men under your command. Period. No excuses. If he were in uniform he should be court martialed.

PS.. I am a disabled Vietnam veteran and have always received excellent care from the V.A. Much better than I ever did through for-profit private HMO's like Kaiser Permanente when I was employed in California.

formermarine wrote on March 6, 2007 2:06 AM:

All I see from these news "leaks" from our wounded vets is the politocos playing politics. They fire a few people and hope it will disappear. Then a bunch of them go down and take a look. I just wonder how many wounded vets were up at 5am cleaning the place and buffing floors. Nothing will change. I hope this just isnt the news of the day and goes away. They deserve much better.

Anonymous wrote on March 6, 2007 4:09 AM:

"The death to wounded ratio is something like 7.5 wounded for every death. So the number that most people see, the number of deaths, is a much smaller number compared to total casualties that were the experience in past wars. The rate in WWII and Vietnam were something like 3-1."

And a lot of those injuries are serious because we're albe to save people now that couldn't be saved in WWII or Vietnam. Many of those people will be disabled, partially or completely, and need a lifetime of care.

Nobody likes unpleasant news, but the administration has a responsibility to inform the public fully and prepare them for the long term price of this war, in blood and treasure.

Of course they're glossing over it to dodge the issues.

Mike wrote on May 14, 2007 9:52 PM:

Hey we veterans have had it easy! We received approx. $30+ billion in disability payments annually, but those poor illegal immigrants in our country used up only $70+ billion annually. I'm willing to give another billion to whomever wants it....something important....lets give it to research for better blueberries or give it to the needy politicians.

kilka wrote on July 31, 2007 12:50 PM:

gmc trucks here www.gmctruck.fora.pl
gmc from america www.gmctruck.fora.pl
real gmc www.gmctruck.fora.pl

and www.emeraldring.fora.pl rings

qzrgl bwska wrote on August 8, 2007 9:04 AM:

redy hnldrxeu hgpe ftghonlxb diuco fizgntkwo ldrahne