Complete Miscarriage of Justice

There has already been a Supreme Court decisoin rendered on a case with similar isses in which the Court ruled in favor of the veteran. However, it appears that judges such as these mentioned in article below, chose to ignore the Court's ruling and set their own rules of law. This action on the part of the courts is a complete miscarriage of justice and goes against the intent of the Congress pursuant to the laws passed governing VA disability compensation. This must stop! Veterans, please get involved by writing to your Representatives and demanding that the laws of Title 38 be upheld by the lower courts pursuant to Supreme Court Rulings.

Judges Robbing Veterans to Pay Alimony

http://www.firebasenetwork.net/

By: John Waltz

johnwaltz76@yahoo.com

Special Assignment Writer

Firebase Network




In an ongoing travesty of veterans being abused is happening in our halls of “justice”. Veterans who are considered 100% disabled should be afforded the right to forgo paying alimony considering they earned it with blood, sweat and tears. How does a former spouse deserve any of that money? Was she in the trenches with this proud soldier giving all they have to ensure our freedoms? There is a law to protect our veterans to stop this atrocity and is titled: U.S. Code, Title 38, §5301(a).



In essence this law does not allow veteran disability compensation to be used in part for any claim from a creditor, taxation, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or reasonable course of action. Judges who follow the book of the law are familiar with this law but turn a blind eye to it. Much like our politicians who have their pockets lined by special groups, the judges are taking the same bribes. The lady of Justice and her scales are being evicted from the court and veterans are losing everything they have because of judges taking most of their pension to pay alimony payments.



These judges should have taken a quote from Theodore Roosevelt who stated, “A man good enough to shed his blood for his country, is good enough to receive a square deal afterwards.” As stated earlier in this article, these benefits are earned by a veteran and should not be given to anyone else. In the Illinois Iroquois County Circuit Court in the matter of Ehler vs. Ehler court case number 97 D 73 the judge clearly ignored the code of law and ordered that his disability payment be used for alimony.



Ron Ehler is a Vietnam Veteran who took many 30 caliber rounds and 2 grenades in a firefight and is now completely 100% disabled. Mr. Ehler was completely unaware of the law that protects our veterans and so was his attorney which left him powerless to defend himself. The judge wanted to hold him in contempt of court and jail him for not paying the amount of alimony that was ordered. He had a court date on October 12, 2006 but was unable to attend because of surgery from his service connected disability. The lawyer finally got the information he needed to defend his client at the hearing but the judge would not listen to it and instead delayed the court date until December. Through research his attorney discovered a case that should have set the precedent in Illinois which was Wojcik vs. Wojcik case no. 2-04-1076. In those findings the judge rightfully allowed Mr. Wojcik to not include his VA disability pension in determining his alimony. So, as we can see there are some real inconsistencies when it comes to deciding if a veteran’s disability is up for grabs or if they are going to follow the letter of the law.



A follow up letter was sent from Mr. Ehler’s attorney to Judge Schmidt trying to draw more light to the federal law and also to the case in which the veteran was allowed to not include his disability payments for alimony payments. The attorney sent back a letter to Mr. Ehlers stating, "My initial research finds that despite what federal law states, the trial court may properly treat a veterans' present and future disability benefits as income in determining your obligation to pay alimony or maintenance." Now even his attorney is intimidated by this judge so it goes to show how much power, greed and corruption is going on in our legal institutions.



It is sad to know that even your attorney can end up being your enemy but if you look at it in the right way, they are all in the same crooked club with judges. It is all about favors and bribes when it comes to our legal system. There no longer is any justice or compassion when it comes to court cases and it seems that the veterans are getting the brunt of it all. For a disabled veteran your compensation is all you have to live on and is rightfully yours. There is no reason that money should be given to anyone else for any reason. Different states and even counties are trying to interpret the law in their own way to suit them. What we need is a federal intervention that will enforce the federal law and make it all uniform whether you are in California or Maine .



In more current affairs our own Firebase member Gordon Sutton aka Firebase Black Horse is going to be defending himself for refusing to pay alimony in Kalamazoo Michigan on December 18, 2006 at 1030 AM. The hearing will be held at 1400 Gull Rd. Kalamazoo Michigan , if you use a direction finder on the internet it is fairly easy to find. If you are any where near Kalamazoo I ask you to attend this hearing and make sure that our veteran’s voices will be heard and this injustice against our brave veterans is stopped. Gordon says "If I am going to jail I think I will bring my wheel chair." Veterans need to unite on this cause and stop judges from robbing them blind.

A Different Christmas Poem

The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light,

I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.

My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,

My daughter beside me, angelic in rest.



Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,

Transforming the yard to a winter delight.

The sparkling lights in the tree I believe,

Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.



My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,

secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.

In perfect contentment, or so it would seem,

So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.



The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near,

But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.

Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know,

Then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.



My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,

And I crept to the door just to see who was near.

Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night,

A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.



A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,

Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.

Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,

Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.



"What are you doing?" I asked without fear,

"Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!

Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,

You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!"



For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift,

Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts.

To the window that danced with a warm fire's light

Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right,



I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night."

"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line,

That separates you from the darkest of times.

No one had to ask or beg or implore me,



I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.

My Gramps died at ' Pearl on a day in December,"

Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers."



My dad stood his watch in the jungles of ' Nam ',

And now it is my turn and so, here I am.

I've not seen my own son in more than a while,

But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile.



Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,

The red, white, and blue... an American flag.

I can live through the cold and the being alone,

Away from my family, my house and my home.



I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet,

I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat.

I can carry the weight of killing another,

Or lay down my life with my sister and brother.



Who stand at the front against any and all,

To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall."

"So go back inside," he said, "harbor no fright,

Your family is waiting and I'll be all right."



"But isn't there something I can do, at the least,

"Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast?”

It seems all too little for all that you've done,

For being away from your wife and your son."



Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret,

"Just tell us you love us, and never forget.

To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,

To stand your own watch, no matter how long.”



For when we come home, either standing or dead,

To know you remember we fought and we bled.

Is payment enough, and with that we will trust,

That we mattered to you as you mattered to us."





PLEASE, Would you do me the kind favor of sending

this to as many people as you can? Christmas will be

coming soon and some credit is due to our U.S. service

men and women for our being able to celebrate these festivities.



Let's try in this small way to pay a tiny bit of what we owe.

Make people stop and think of our heroes, living and dead,

who sacrificed themselves for us.



LCDR Jeff Giles, SC, USN

30th Naval Construction Regiment

OIC, Logistics Cell One

Al Taqqadum , Iraq

VA Deeper in the HOLE

VA falls further behind, new records show
BY CHRIS ADAMS
Miami Hearld

The Department of Veterans Affairs fell further behind this year in its attempts to give veterans timely decisions on their disability claims, new records show.
The latest numbers are in an annual report the VA prepares for Congress detailing a range of short- and long-term goals for its disability, health and other benefit programs. Overall, the agency either has fallen behind or has made no progress in improving its performance in more than half of what it lists as its key goals.

In the benefits measure the VA has said is ''most critical to veterans'' -- the speed of processing disability claims -- the agency lost ground for the third year in a row.

Moreover, McClatchy has found that the VA put a positive spin on many of its numbers and in two instances provided Congress with incorrect or incomplete figures.

The agency said it took an average of 183 days to process a claim in fiscal 2007, longer than in any of the five years tracked in the report. Processing exceeded its 2007 goal of 160 days and its long-term goal of eventually reducing processing time to 125 days.

PROCESSING SPEED

Congress and veterans closely watch the time it takes the VA to process claims, and the agency has vowed in previous years to pick up the pace. When it was asked about its processing speed last year, for example, the VA told McClatchy that hiring new workers would help it increase production and decrease its backlog of claims in 2007.

In fact, processing time increased by an average of six days, and the backlog of pending claims rose from 377,681 to 391,257, the agency's records show.

The VA said this week that it was aggressively tackling the issue, hiring more than 1,000 workers, boosting overtime and revamping training. The agency also said it was receiving more disability claims than it had at any time in recent history, and that it had received more than it had expected in 2007.

Beyond that, the agency said that meeting or exceeding its goals wasn't always the best measure of success.

''The VA sets goals to measure how we are doing so that we can continuously improve performance, '' said Bob Henke, the assistant secretary for management. ``We use goals to move and improve performance. ''

But for Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the report is more evidence that the agency hasn't been upfront with Congress about its performance or its needs.

''It is extremely frustrating to hear the song and dance that we are doing better when the reality is we are not,'' said Murray, a member of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. ``I want to say I'm surprised. But I'm not.''

In many sections of the report, the VA looks past the missed goals to put the best face on its efforts.

The VA reports that 95 percent or more of outpatient visits are scheduled within 30 days of patients' desired dates, a fact it's touted to Congress repeatedly. The agency's inspector general, however, found this year that only 75 percent of the visits it examined took place within 30 days. The VA said it didn't agree with that finding and was examining the issue.

`TRANSPOSITION ERROR'

The VA also claimed that customer-satisfacti on ratings by inpatients at VA hospitals are 10 points higher than ratings from private-sector hospitals. In fact, the number the agency used as a comparison is wrong, and as a result the advantage for VA hospitals is half as big as the VA claims.

The VA told McClatchy on Monday that the mistake was made by a ``transposition error and we will be fixing that as soon as possible.''

Claims Backlog Suggestions

By Rick Maze - rmaze@militarytimes .com
Posted : December 03, 2007
http://www.armytime s.com/issues/ stories/0- ARMYPAPER- 3198358.php

The Department of Veterans Affairs hopes to one day harness the power of technology to speed the processing of veterans’ benefits claims, but it is wary of ideas for quickly reducing the claims backlog, which is hovering around 400,000.

That has not kept some radical suggestions from being made.

Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., House Veterans’ Affairs Committee chairman, suggests that the VA approve, with no questions, most Agent Orange-related claims of Vietnam veterans, allowing more time to concentrate on new claims from Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. Filner said the long wait for receiving disability and survivor benefits is one of the most vexing problems facing the VA, which has had only modest success in whittling the backlog by hiring more claims processors.

Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., and Fred Upton, R-Mich., are sponsoring a bill, the Immediate Benefits for Wounded Warriors Act, that would give partial payments to some veterans while they wait for a formal VA claims decision, which can take a year for initial claims and up to three years for appeals.

Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., said he is “very disappointed” in the VA for not coming up with more new ideas of its own.

Lamborn has introduced a bill that includes a pilot program for handling some electronic claims through automation. “This bill is not perfect,” he said. “But rather than offering a simple, out-of-hand dismissal, I would have appreciated constructive input.”

His bill is controversial; Paralyzed Veterans of America, for example, “does not believe that software exists that can replace the human element,” said Richard Daley, the group’s legislative director, at a Nov. 8 hearing of the House Veterans’ Affairs subcommittee on disability assistance.

********* PVA.org info

http://www.pva. org/site/ PageServer? pagename= homepage

Any individual who meets the following criteria is eligible to join PVA:

A citizen of the United States
A veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces whose discharge was other than dishonorable
An individual who has suffered a spinal cord injury as a result of trauma or disease.* (Note: The injury or disease onset could have occurred after discharge/retiremen t from military service.)
* Some examples of spinal cord diseases are:

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)
Lupus
Tuberculosis
Multiple sclerosis (MS)
Poliomyelitis
Spina bifida
Spinal stenosis
Tumors of the spinal cord
The above list is not all-inclusive. Therefore, if your condition is not listed, or if you have any questions, contact PVA membership staff.

Kick In The Ass

Sometimes a Kick in the Fanny is the Best Medicine by Col. Bob Pappas, USMC,
Ret.

The recent revelation that the Army was collecting a pro rata share of
combat bonuses from soldiers who were injured and unable to complete their
combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan is indicative of the mentality that too
often pervades the bureaucrats in the Pentagon.and elsewhere in Washington.
Although it is unclear at this point who the culprit is, it is the height of
either ignorance or bureaucratic "B.S." that American Veterans who are
awarded combat bonuses for their voluntary service, and are injured enough
to warrant evacuation and termination of their combat duty are then served
with collection notices for the unfinished portion of their tours of duty.
In some cases unused leave is zeroed out to partially offset the "debt."

It would come as no surprise if Dr. David Chu, Under Secretary of Defense
(Personnel and Readiness) were the culprit. Whether Dr. Chu personally
issued the directive to collect, or it was some bootlicking subordinate, Dr.
Chu is no friend of military personnel. Chu is a Machiavellian, backstabbing
appointed careerist bureaucrat who should be tarred, feathered and run out
of Washington. Rather than have the cajones to go to the Congress for the
funds needed to properly fund military manpower programs and issues, Chu
finds funding by cutting active and retiree military personnel benefits, or
increasing the costs for access to those benefits. In another of his little
games, Chu pits active forces versus retirees before the Congress in an
effort to redirect retiree benefits. Great guy this Chu.

While the President and Congress were on their wild spending spree in the
early years of the Bush Administration, great fiscal conservatives these
Republicans, Chu did nothing to improve the overall lot of military members
and retirees. Rather, Chu, the Secretary of Defense, the President and the
Congress were abject, unmitigated numb skulls when it came to "taking care
of our own."

During the years when there was a Republican Congress and Administration,
they had the opportunity to practice the true Conservative message of taking
care of the troops, but no, they and their Democrat "co-conspirators" were
more interested in flooding the individual and corporate welfare system,
doling out billions of dollars in make work contracts, unnecessary price
supports, and flooding the budget with "earmarks" that were shameful and
gluttonous, all to take care of their respective constituencies.

Now the economic chickens are coming home to roost, and guess who will be
asked to "invest their share" to pay for it? It sure as hell won't be the
Careerists in Congress, although it may include careerist bureaucrats.

The Veteran's Administration makes much ado about its progress in taking
care of Veterans, just read the VA report, but it is pathetically lacking in
human terms. Of course there are good people in the VA, without a doubt
there are genuinely caring, underpaid and overworked people who do their
utmost to care for America's Veterans, but the kind of non-sense embodied in
the recent revelation about the services recouping combat bonuses, shows
that there is a deep seated bias against the very people who volunteer to
protect them from those who would destroy them and this nation.

Every time there is a fiscal issue, every single Administration as far back
as I can remember, immediately looked to military members and retirees to
absorb the cuts. During the sixties and seventies there was a concerted
effort to erode the benefits of military members to the point that
recruiting was problematic and the Draft was nigh impossible. So, when the
All Volunteer Force (AVF) came along with its targeted bonuses, some thought
that it was the panacea for all recruiting ills.

The AVF worked well in the relative peace that ensued. But, now, without the
"American Foreign Legion" i.e. "immigrants" legal or otherwise, Reserves,
Guard, and women the vaunted AVF would collapse. Then there are those
backstabbing members of Congress who want the Draft because they know that
given their experience from the '60s the streets would fill with those who
might be confronted with, "ask not what your country can do for you rather
ask what you can do for your country."

So far only one so called, "journalist" from the "land of fruits and nuts"
that I know about has had the gall to refer to active military members as
"mercenaries. " One can bet a paycheck that there are hundreds of the same
ilk but without the cajones to do the same. What those pathetic ignoramuses
don't know or appreciate is that their little pink, brown, black, yellow or
red behinds are being protected by men and women whose boots they are not
worthy to lick, whose courage they do not have, and one of them has more
patriotism than the entire entertainment and media industries combined.

Until we begin electing patriots who are more interested in this country
than being political careerists like Senator Trent Lott (good riddance), or
US Representative Jeff Miller and all but a handful of the 535 members of
Congress, Veterans will continue to be castoffs rather than rewarded with
the honor, respect and care that is they have earned and truly deserve.

Until we elect patriots who will put first those who make this country
possible through their voluntary and dedicated service, the Dr. Chus in the
bureaucracy, whether Republican or Democrat will treat service members like
so many chattel. Dr. Chu may be the world's greatest mathematician, but he
is about as concerned for the very people he manages as Hitler was of the
Jews.

Now, for those highly paid elected and civil servants for whom it is just a
job, get off your asses and begin taking care of the troops! Get it!!!?

Strong letter follows!

Semper Fidelis,

If you wish to write a letter to the Editor please use:
http://www.gulf1. net/letters/ NewLetter. htm

If you wish to read PREVIOUS ARTICLES by Col Pappas, please see:
http://www.gulf1. com/columns/ pappas/pappasfra me.htm

If you wish to send a comment or ask a question of Bob Pappas please use:
pappas@gulf1. com

If you do not wish to continue to receive these columns by Col Pappas please
complete the form at: http://www.gulf1. com/mail/ columns/remove_ pappas.htm

Copyright C November 27th, 2007, by Robert L. Pappas. With proper
attribution, this essay may be quoted and redistributed. It may not be used
in any way, in conjunction with any advertisement without the author's
expressed written permission.

Attorneys Offer Help w/Claims FREE

More than half of the disability cases decided by the 57 regional offices of the Department of Veterans Afairs are reversed or returned for reconsideration upon appeal
www.nvlsp.org

http://www.usatoday .com/news/ nation/2007- 11-26-valawyers_ N.htm

Lawyers step up to help veterans gratis


By Laura Parker, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The scene resembled Hollywood's version of how a multibillion- dollar legal deal might be negotiated. Big-name corporate law firm. Posh conference room, with a conference table so large 70 attorneys fit easily around it. Video technicians, hovering nearby, beam the meeting to other big law firms from Boston to Seattle.
Yet there was no deal to cut. Instead, the high-powered lawyers were getting a tutorial in the arcane vagaries of veterans law.

"This could be the VA's worst nightmare," Bart Stichman, one of the organizers, enthused from the podium. "Hundreds of attorneys from around the country providing legal service to veterans for free."

The recent gathering at Sidley Austin, a firm with 1,700 lawyers around the globe, is part of a growing effort to provide free legal help to thousands of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who are trying to win disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

"There are 100,000 veterans seeking benefits, and too many of them are waiting too long to get them," says Ron Abrams, who, with Stichman, directs the National Veterans Legal Services Program, a non-profit group in Washington spearheading the effort. "These lawyers are going to treat these veterans the way they would treat their corporate clients."

The approach marks the first time since the Civil War that attorneys have been recruited in large numbers to represent veterans. The lawyers hope their legal expertise will speed consideration of claims and result in better benefits for veterans, Stichman says. More than 50 of the largest law firms in the USA and more than 400 attorneys have signed up. Stichman and Abrams hope to start assigning veterans to the attorneys early next month.

Law schools join cause

Amanda Smith, an attorney with the Philadelphia- based firm Morgan Lewis, says many of the participating lawyers are Vietnam veterans and "are appalled at the circumstances that they find veterans in today."

Besides the push by big law firms, law schools in states such as the Carolinas, Virginia, Delaware, Michigan and Illinois also are offering free services to veterans.

Craig Kabatchnick, who worked as a VA appellate attorney from 1990 until 1995, launched a clinic last January for veterans at North Carolina Central University's law school, where he now teaches.

"We had all kinds of veterans who were very disabled, litigating against trained attorneys like myself who were defending the VA," Kabatchnick says. The VA would "win" if the claim was denied, Kabatchnick says. "Did we litigate to win? Absolutely. In cases where the veteran was representing himself, the win ratio was very high."

Paul Hutter, the VA's general counsel, says its attorneys have "an ethical obligation to fairly and justly" review claims and settle "meritorious cases quickly."

"Our job is to ensure that veterans get the benefits allowed them by law," he says in an e-mail.

Disability claims have increased from 578,773 in fiscal 2000 to 838,141 this year, according to VA figures. There are about 407,000 pending. The average processing time is 177 days, the VA says.

Change in law lifted restrictions

Traditionally, veterans have represented themselves or sought assistance from a service organization, such as the American Legion or the Veterans of Foreign Wars. But many of the caseworkers in those groups are overloaded with cases, Stichman says, and sometimes one volunteer oversees 1,000 veterans' claims.

The approach has not led to quick compensation for veterans. Evidence supporting a veteran's claim — medical records or letters from colleagues — is not always submitted with the original claim. When that evidence is added later, it can lead to reversals or requests for reconsideration. That can add more than a year to the appeals process, the VA says.

The Board of Veterans Appeals either reverses or orders reconsideration of decisions made by VA regional offices 56% of the time, according to an analysis of VA figures by Stichman's group. Congress has long kept attorneys at arms-length from the veterans' disability process. Until last June, when federal law changed, paid attorneys could not work on cases until after a final decision by the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The VA is now considering regulations that would require all attorneys to pass a test in order to qualify to handle veterans' claims, according to Phil Budahn, a department spokesman.

Service organizations, including the Disabled American Veterans and Veterans of Foreign Wars, vigorously fought the change in law. They are now pushing to repeal the law and support requiring a test, arguing that lawyers could turn what is supposed to be a non-adversarial process into a litigious one.

"The fear was lawyers will dominate, and they'll ruin everything," says Thomas Reed, a law professor at Widener University in Wilmington, Del., who began offering free legal services to veterans in 1997.

Lawyers not the cure-all

Joe Violante, national legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, which represents 1.3 million veterans, says trained volunteers from the service organizations are far more experienced at representing veterans' claims than the newly recruited lawyers.

"If the veteran is under the impression that an attorney is going to get their claim through faster, there's no proof of that," he says.

Ron Flagg, a Sidley attorney involved in the pro bono veterans' project, says there are so many claims that the system is overwhelmed.

"Lawyers are not the cure to all ills," he says. "But this is a problem where lawyers can be helpful."

************


APPEALS GET SECOND LOOK

More than half of the disability cases decided by the 57 regional offices of the Department of Veterans Afairs are reversed or returned for reconsideration upon appeal. In fiscal 2007, the Board of Veterans' Appeals heard 40,401 cases. Of those, 22,817 or 56% were overturned or sent back to regional offices. Status of appealed cases at the 10 largest regional VA offices:

City Reversed{+1} Sent back{+2} Total{+3}

Atlanta 23% 40% 63%

St. Petersburg, Fla. 26% 37% 63%

Little Rock 22% 39% 61%

New York 22% 38% 60%

Nashville 23% 37% 60%

Montgomery, Ala. 20% 38% 58%

Winston-Salem, N.C. 23% 34% 57%

Houston 18% 36% 54%

Waco, Texas 19% 33% 52%

St. Louis 18% 33% 51%

National average 21% 35% 56%


1 - Claim granted by the Board of Veterans' Appeals after being rejected by the regional office.

2 - Claim sent back to the regional office for further review.

3 - Total percentage of claims reversed or sent back.

Source: National Veterans Legal Services Program analysis of Board of Veterans' Appeals figures for fiscal year 2007

Struggling For VA Health Care

The battle at home: Struggling for VA health care access
Veterans are encountering administrative barriers, waiting lists and staffing shortages when they try to use the VA's health system.
By David Glendinning, AMNews staff. Dec. 3, 2007.

http://www.ama- assn.org/ amednews/ 2007/12/03/ gvsa1203. htm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For some veterans, the fight didn't stop on the streets of Iraq or in the mountains of Afghanistan. Despite the promise that world-class medical care would be there for them when they arrived home, some are running into a bureaucratic battlefield and a stressed system struggling to give aid.

Recent congressional and public attention has focused on access problems at the Dept. of Veterans Affairs, which provides medical care to servicemen and women once they have left active duty in a time of war or an official period of hostility. Although investigators note that improvements are under way, they say the VA has a long way to go.


Nearly 700,000 active-duty personnel and reservists who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Afghanistan' s Operation Enduring Freedom have been eligible for VA health care since 2002. More than 200,000 have sought it out so far, the Congressional Budget Office reported in October. While this represents only a small fraction of the nearly 8 million veterans from all conflicts who are enrolled, the impact of veterans from today's wars on the system is great.

Thanks to recent advances in battlefield medicine, more servicemen and women are surviving severe injuries, CBO said. But they require more costly medical care when they return. The rapid influx of new enrollees has helped strain a system that already was under pressure from caring for the veterans of yesterday's wars. In 1995, fewer than 3 million veterans received VA health services. That number had increased to 5 million last year.

Many of the resulting access problems start at the very beginning of the enrollment process, said Donna E. Shalala, PhD, president of the University of Miami and former Dept. of Health and Human Services secretary. She co-chaired a presidential commission on care for America's "wounded warriors" that convened earlier this year after news reports exposed substandard conditions and a mass of red tape at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

Although the Dept. of Defense and VA need to work together to foster a patient-centered continuum of care for each veteran, the commission found evidence that returning personnel were not experiencing a smooth transition from military health care to the veterans system, Dr. Shalala said.

There are nearly 8 million veterans in the VA system.
Without designated care coordinators to plan the best treatment path for new patients, an untold number ended up lost.

In addition, injured combatants must go through two antiquated disability assessments -- one by the military and one by the VA -- to determine what treatment options are available. This means that many are forced to jump through bureaucratic hoops that might not even get them to the right place, Dr. Shalala said.

"For veterans' families to give up everything just to coordinate this care themselves is fundamentally unfair," she said. "The process is too old-fashioned. It has nothing to do with modern medicine, and we ought to be embarrassed. "

The Bush administration scrambled to correct several problems identified in the commission's July report. The Defense Dept. and VA in October agreed on an initial plan to place at least 10 care coordinators at four military medical sites that often serve as the first stop for wounded veterans. The Army also announced in October the formation of "warrior transition units" consisting of primary care physicians, nurse case managers and mental health professionals that would serve a similar purpose.

But Dr. Shalala said progress is still slower than she would like, and some of the commission's recommendations would require tough congressional action. The proposal to consolidate and modernize the disability review process, for instance, quickly became mired in partisan bickering.

Delays and headaches
For veterans who make it through the VA's bureaucratic gauntlet, the care they need might not be immediately accessible or available.

The department has more than 150 hospitals and nearly 900 outpatient clinics. While the number of facilities has increased in recent years, it is not nearly enough to provide VA services everywhere in the country. Many patients in rural or remote areas must travel hundreds of miles to reach the nearest department facility -- an impossible prospect for many.

The VA has more than 150 hospitals and nearly 900 outpatient clinics.
Jeffrey Scavron, MD, a former Navy doctor who practices at a community health center in Springfield, Mass., has seen this problem firsthand. Veterans in his area can get basic services at the Northampton VA Medical Center in nearby Leeds, Mass., but often must travel to Boston or Connecticut if they need to see certain types of specialists through the system. Some simply cannot make the trip and go without the care rather than pay for it, he said.

When veterans decide to stick with the VA, the system does not always respond quickly. Advocacy groups have complained to lawmakers that some enrollees seeking appointments, non-emergency surgeries or other medical care have been placed on waiting lists when facilities have been unable to meet demand.

In recent years, Spokane (Wash.) VA Medical Center implemented waiting lists when lean federal budgets forced it to cut back on services, said Joseph M. Manley, the center's former director. At one point, more than 3,000 veterans were waiting for more than a year just to receive their initial medical appointments.

The VA strives to see all patients within 30 days of when they call for an appointment. Out of the roughly 39 million appointments processed in a year, about 4 million exceed the 30-day threshold, said Michael J. Kussman, MD, the VA's health under secretary. While this leaves room for improvement, the department is proud of its nearly 90% record, especially because these appointments are not for urgent or emergent medical situations, he said. "I'm not aware of people being hurt in any way by some of the delays."

The VA's record is disputed by the department's inspector general, who in September released an audit that found the VA analysis likely understated wait times.

Not enough doctors to go around
Some facilities have little choice but to make patients wait for treatments or to refer them elsewhere because they do not have enough medical personnel. The department has struggled, along with many private health systems, to provide quick access to such in-demand subspecialists as dermatologists, ophthalmologists and otolaryngologists, Dr. Kussman said. Mental health professionals also are at a premium, the VA reports.

Some experts on the ground say the situation can be particularly difficult for the department when it attempts to treat veterans who have complex and specialized wounds, such as traumatic brain injuries -- the signature injury of today's wars.

1.8 million veterans were uninsured in 2004, up nearly 300,000 since 2000.
The VA polytrauma rehabilitation center in Palo Alto, Calif., is touted as a flagship for taking care of the most severely wounded veterans but still faces major staffing concerns. The center works hard to attract and retain physicians and others in a very competitive market, but it has fallen short of recruitment goals for physiatrists and other medical professionals, said its director, Elizabeth Joyce Freeman.

Veterans advocacy groups say the way the VA receives federal health funding is largely to blame for many of its shortfalls. Unlike Medicare and Medicaid, which receive mandatory funding every year based on projected costs, the department gets its money from the discretionary budget. This process is much less predictable and more prone to political tinkering.

Although Congress in recent years has kept up a steady stream of funding that has satisfied many advocates, the process has not been without missteps.

The department weathered an embarrassing episode in 2005 when then-Secretary R. James Nicholson went to Congress with a request for $2.6 billion in additional funding because it had vastly underestimated the number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who would require care.

The budget unpredictability makes it hard for VA facilities to plan ahead on hiring physicians or buying equipment, said Joseph A. Violante, the Disabled Veterans of America national legislative director.

Veterans can be waitlisted or shut out as a result.

"If the VA was able to get the funding on time and was able to know beforehand what that funding level was going to be, a lot of those access problems would be solved," he said.

The department opposes mandatory funding because the process would not easily adapt to changes in clinical practice or enrollee demographics, said W. Paul Kearns III, VA chief health financial officer.

Finding care outside -- or not at all
For some veterans, accessing VA health care simply will not be the best option because of their circumstances, locations or the specialized care they need. Some, especially those who plan to return to active duty, will continue to receive care from the military. Others will enroll in private insurance or receive coverage through another government program once they re-enter private life.

The department has boosted the amount it spends on private-sector care for veterans who remain enrolled in the VA but need to receive care outside the system. In fiscal year 2007, the department committed $2.2 billion out of its roughly $35 billion health budget to such fee-for-service care, a figure that has doubled since 2000.

For others, accessing VA health care is not an option at all. In 2003, the Bush administration decided to cut off new enrollment for many Priority Group 8 veterans, the department's lowest disability rating. These veterans are deemed to have sustained no service-connected disabilities and have yearly incomes that exceed predetermined limits, about $28,000 for an individual.

All combat veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan are still guaranteed two years of free VA care after they return, and Priority Group 8 combat veterans who enroll during that window can keep receiving the care beyond that timeframe by making set co-payments. But those who fail to enroll in time risk losing access unless they later can prove they actually sustained a disability during their service.

Lawmakers have proposed extending the free combat veteran care from two years to five years, a move the White House supports. The Bush administration, however, opposes any plan to reopen new enrollment to non-combat Priority 8 veterans because the new enrollees would cost tens of billions over the decade and could hurt access and quality for higher priority patients, Dr. Kussman said.

But as long as this and other barriers exist, veterans who can't afford or obtain private coverage will go without needed care, said Steffie Woolhandler, MD, MPH, a Harvard Medical School professor and co-founder of Physicians for a National Health Program, a single-payer advocacy group. An October study she co-authored concluded that 1.8 million veterans from all conflicts were uninsured in 2004, up nearly 300,000 since 2000. Nearly half of them had not seen a physician in more than a year.

Dr. Scavron, the former Navy physician, said the uninsured veterans he sees in his clinic are evidence that the government is not fulfilling its responsibilities

"It's only the government that can take you into military service," he said. "So it seems to me that it's only the government who can take responsibility for the people that they take into service."

M21 Manual Changes per court order

[Federal Register: November 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 227)]
[Notices]
[Page 66218-66219]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access. gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27no07- 132]
============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= =====
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
VA Adjudications Manual, M21-1; Rescission of Manual M21-1
Provisions Related To Exposure to Herbicides Based on Receipt of the Vietnam Service Medal
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Notice, with request for comments.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to rescind provisions of its Adjudication Procedures Manual, M21-1 (M21-1) that were found by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) not to have been properly rescinded.
DATES: Comments must be received by VA on or before January 28, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through http://www.Regulati ons.gov; by mail or hand-delivery to the Director, Regulations Management (00REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273-9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ``Rescission of Manual M21-1 Provisions Related to Exposure to Herbicides Based On Receipt of the Vietnam Service Medal.'' Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 273-9515 for an appointment. In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at http://www.Regulati ons.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhonda F. Ford, Chief, Regulations Staff (211D), Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273-7210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rulemaking is necessitated by the opinion rendered by the CAVC in Haas v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 257 (2006), notice of appeal filed, No. 07-7037 (Oct. 26, 2006). In that opinion, the CAVC concluded that certain provisions of VA's Adjudication Procedures Manual M21-1 (M21-1) were substantive provisions that had not been properly rescinded. Id. at 276-78. We have appealed Haas, and if we are successful on appeal, this rulemaking will be withdrawn. However, in the event that we do not prevail on appeal, we now take action to properly rescind the provisions.


In Haas, the CAVC held that a 1991 M21-1 provision required VA to concede that Mr. Haas had served in Vietnam, and was presumed to have been exposed to herbicides during service, because he had received the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM). Haas, 20 Vet. App. at 270-72 (quoting in full and discussing M21-1, part III, para. 4.08(k)(1)-( 2) (1991)). In 2002, VA had issued a new M21-1 provision that more clearly restated the 1991 provision, advising that receipt of the VSM could indicate service on land in Vietnam but, by itself, was not proof of such service. M21-1, pt. III, para. 4.24(e)(1)-( 2), change 88 (Feb. 27, 2002). However, the CAVC held that VA's 2002 revision of the M21-1 was ineffective because VA had not followed the notice and comment procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 553(a). Haas, 270 Vet. App. at 275-78.


As interpreted by the CAVC, the 1991 M21-1 provision requires VA, in at least some circumstances, to concede service in Vietnam, and thus herbicide exposure, based merely on the receipt of the VSM, even if all other evidence indicates that the veteran did not serve on land or on inland waterways in Vietnam and therefore was exceedingly unlikely to have been exposed to herbicides as a result of Vietnam service. VA revised the M21-1 in 2002 because, although receipt of the VSM is an indication of possible service in Vietnam, it is not definitive or conclusive evidence of such service. It is inappropriate to include receipt of the VSM as a sole criterion for the presumption of exposure to herbicide agents due to service in Vietnam because a veteran may have received this medal for service in locations other than Vietnam. (The VSM was awarded to all members of the Armed Forces who served between July 3, 1965, and March 28, 1973, either: (1) In Vietnam and contiguous waters and airspace thereover; or (2) in Thailand, Laos, or Cambodia, or airspace thereover, in direct support of operations in Vietnam. See Army Reg. 600-8-22, para. 2-13.) The 2002 revision was intended to clarify VA's view that receipt of the VSM does not require or permit VA to ignore other evidence indicating that a veteran did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam. Because the CAVC's interpretation of the 1991 M21-1 provision does not accord with VA's intent in issuing that provision, we propose to rescind it.


The M21-1 is an internal manual used to convey guidance to VA adjudicators. It is not intended to establish substantive rules beyond those contained in statute and regulation. Neither the 1991 nor the 2002 M21-1 provision, nor any intervening revision to such provisions, was intended to establish a substantive rule. Further, the 1991 provision was not intended to convey the rule the CAVC imputed to that provision, treating the VSM as conclusive evidence of service in Vietnam even if other evidence would support a finding that the veteran did not serve in Vietnam. However, because the CAVC held that the 1991
M21-1 provision established a substantive rule, and because that rule, as interpreted by the CAVC, is inconsistent with VA's intent, we are proposing to rescind the M21-1 provision.


we note as well that we will soon be revising Sec. 3.307(a)(6)( iii) to clarify VA's interpretation of the statutory authority governing service in Vietnam for purposes of the presumption of herbicide exposure. In view of the confusion created by the M21-1 provisions in the Haas case, we believe it is preferable to rescind the M21-1 provisions relating to proof of service in Vietnam, including the 1991 provision at issue in Haas, the 2002 clarifying revision to that provision, and intervening revisions. This will enable VA to clarify and ensure that its interpretation of the governing statutory provisions set forth in its regulation and to minimize the possibility of a perceived or unintended inconsistency based on VA's internal manual.
Hence, VA proposes to rescind the following manual provisions describing service in Vietnam for the purposes of the presumption of exposure to herbicides: M21-1, pt. III, para. 4.08(k)(1)-( 2) (November 8, 1991); M21-1, pt. III, para. 4.24(g)(1)-( 2), change 23 (October 6, 1993); M21-1, pt. III, para. 4.24(g)(1)-( 2), change 41 (July 12, 1995); M21-1, pt. III, para. 4.24(g)(1)-( 2), change 76 (June 1, 1999); M21-1, pt. III, para. 4.24(e)(1)-( 2), change 88 February 27, 2002).
Approved: November 19, 2007.
Gordon H. Mansfield,
Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. E7-22983 Filed 11-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P

VA Numbers

Updated 10/25/07

VA Benefits & Health Care Utilization

Number of Veterans Receiving VA Disability Compensation (as of 09/30/07):

2.8 M

Number of Veterans Rated 100% Disabled (as of 09/30/07):

249,904

Number of Veterans Receiving VA Pension (as of 09/30/07):

323,012

Number of Spouses Receiving DIC (as of 09/30/07):

317,371

Number of Total Enrollees in VA Health Care System (FY 06):

7.9 M1

Number of Total Unique Patients Treated (FY 06):

5.5 M1

Number of Veterans Compensated for PTSD (as of 09/30/07):

299,672

Number of Veterans in Receipt of IU Benefits (as of 09/30/07):

237,321

Number of VA Education Beneficiaries (FY 07):

523,344

Number of VA Veteran Life Insurance Beneficiaries (as of 09/30/07):

1.695 M

Number of VA Voc Rehab (Chapter 31) Trainees (as of FY 07):

52,477

Number of Home Loans Guaranteed by VA (cumulative as of 09/30/07):

2.2 M

Number of Health Care Professionals Rotating Through VA (FY 06):

100,893

Number of OEF/OIF Amputees (as of 09/01/07):

6812

Source: DVA Information Technology Center; Health Services Training Report; VBA Education Service; 1 VHA (105);

A 2 DOD

Veterans Demographics

Projected U.S. Veterans Population: 23,532,000

{Female 1,745,000 7%}

Projected Number of Living WW II Veterans (as of 9/30/2007):

2,795,000

Number of WW II Veterans Pass Away Per Day:

1,000

Percentage of Veteran Population 65 or Older:

39%

Veteran Population by Race: White Non-Hispanic 80%

Hispanic 6%

Black Non-Hispanic 11%

Other 4%

About VA

Number of VA Employees:

254,183

Number of VA Medical Centers:

153

Number of VA Outpatient Clinics:

724

Number of VA Vet Centers:

208

Number of VBA Regional Offices:

57

Number of VA National Cemeteries:

125

FY06 Appropriations (actual)1

VA: $73.6B

VHA: $31.0B 2

VBA-GOE: $1.08B

NCA: $150M

FY07 Appropriations (enacted)1

VA: $80.2B

VHA: $34.5B 2

VBA-GOE: $1.17B

NCA: $161M

FY08 Appropriations (request)1

VA: $86.4B

VHA: $36.6B 2

VBA-GOE: $1.20B

NCA: $167M

Produced by Office of Policy and Planning (008)

Source: Veteran Population as of 09/30/07; VA Employ Pay Status Count 09/30/07; Veterans Affairs Site Tracking

(VAST) 06/29/07; NCA as of 06/30/07; Office of Budget; Health Services Training Report FY06 ; 1 Includes MCCF;

2 Medical Care w/ MCCF

Graphic by Doc


FORT STEWART MEMORIAL SAYS "NO" TO IRAQ VET WHO DIED

OF INFECTION STATESIDE -- "Unless you're shot or blown up,

you don't get a tree. It is a major, major slap in the face."

See Story here:http://vawatchdog.org/07/nf07/nfNOV07/nf112607-1.htm


To some this may appear to be a new story, something that has just happened to this young man and his family, but this story is not new, nor is this family the first to fight for some official form of remembrance of a loved one. This young man is not the first to lose his life after serving in a combat zone as a result of that service but not as a direct result of enemy action. After every war there are those who die from either wounds or illness who are all but forgotten as having been one to give their life for their country.

Since I am a Vietnam veteran, I will use the Vietnam war to illustrate my point, although this is not something that is specific to Vietnam as it happens in all wars. After the erection of the Vietnam Memorial Wall there were those who questioned the names appearing on the wall and wondering why their loved one's name did not appear as they died as a result of wounds incurred in Vietnam but after returning home and being discharged from military service. They received the same reply from military sources as the family of this young soldier of Iraq received, they did not die as a result of hostile actions, i.e. on the battle field or in the military hospital immediately after receiving wound. There have been countless soldiers, men and women, who have died as a result of their military service, in war time, who did not receive any official remembrance for their sacrifice. The sad thing is that there will be more to follow these all but forgotten warriors.

We have thousands of warriors today from WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and all the other smaller, less heard of, conflicts around the world who suffer from PTSD, or some other illness or physical wound, and some of them will die, perhaps at their own hand, perhaps in other ways related to their PTSD symptoms, illness or wound, who will not be counted as causalities of war. These warriors, I have for years called the MIA's IN The USA, the forgotten ones.

When we read the newspapers, hear the news reports on TV or radio about the cost of war in the number of lives lost little do we consider that these reports are only the very tip of the iceberg, only those who die as the result of direct combat operations or accidents while on missions on, perhaps, in training now days. No thought is given to the countless thousands who will ultimately lose their lives as a result of their combat experiences. They are for all intents and purposes forgotten. Thus, the American public never get a full accounting of the true cost of war, the price of freedom.

Money Placed Above Healthcare

Disability payments held up for some Iraq vets
Jordan Green
News editor



“The VA told me: ‘Hey, you’re screwed up because of the war,’” retired Army Sgt. Quentin Richardson says. “I didn’t come up with that. It should be automatic. I don’t think there should be any debate about whether or not you should receive the benefits. I didn’t debate serving.”

Quentin Richardson saved the US government $750,000 when he implemented a tracking system to eliminate inefficiencies in the distribution of supplies to detainees at Camp Bucca in southern Iraq. While there, he sacrificed a piece of his sanity when he helped quell a riot of detainees recently relocated from Abu Ghraib, and afterwards carried some of their bodies to the morgue.

In return, the US Department of Veterans Affairs at first insisted that the former National Guard Army sergeant return $17,000 in separation pay received from earlier military service in the Marine Corps before he received disability benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder.

"My life is a nightmare," said the 45-year-old Greensboro veteran, who has not been able to find employment since he returned from Iraq in October 2005. "I was treated better in Iraq than here. I start my day by going to the cabinet to get medication, and I've never been on antidepressants before."

Richardson reenlisted with the National Guard in November 2001, almost a decade after receiving an honorable discharge following the fulfillment of his commitment to the Marine Corps. He deployed as a detainee supply sergeant with the 105th Military Police Battalion in October 2004 to Camp Bucca at Umm Qasr, a port city near the border of Kuwait.

"I decided after 9-11 that I should serve," Richardson said. "I honestly would not have done that if I knew I would have to repay that separation pay, if I knew the battle that I would have to fight with the VA. I left one battleground to return to another."

National advocates say they are seeing a rising number of cases involving Iraq war veterans who incur PTSD and other disabilities after reenlisting, only to find they are unable to receive immediate benefits until they return separation pay.

"This is becoming a widespread problem and the American Legion is concerned because we want to make sure these veterans and service members receive the benefits to which they're entitled," said Peter Gaytan, director of the American Legion's veterans affairs and rehabilitation division. "It's often an extreme hardship for these service members to have to repay prior benefits."

Gaytan said the emergence of complaints by disabled veterans who find their benefits held up because of prior separation pay is so recent that his organization is still struggling to get a handle on how widespread the problem might be.

Coinciding with the increased attention focused on bureaucratic frustration experienced by disabled veterans who have recently returned from combat zones, a new study finds that National Guard members and Army reservists report higher rates of mental health problems than their active-duty counterparts. The study by Army researchers, which was published by the Journal of the American Medical Association three days after Veterans Day, found that difficulties with interpersonal conflict, depression and PTSD increased sharply for all soldiers between the time of their immediate redeployment and later screenings several months into their return to civilian life, with Guard members and reservists reporting consistently higher rates of post-combat difficulties.

"Although rates of PTSD and depression increased substantially between the two assessments, the fourfold increase in concerns about interpersonal conflict highlights the potential impact of this war on family relationships and mirrors findings from prior wars," the study found. The authors wrote that "lack of day-to-day support from war comrades and the added stress of transitioning back to civilian employment" is a unique factor that potentially explains the Guard member and reservists' higher rates of mental health challenges.

Compounding the problem for returning soldiers is a backlog of disability claims at the VA.

"It is an inordinate amount of time that the VA takes to process claims," said William Bradshaw, national service director for Veterans of Foreign Wars. "We are saying that they have a backlog of 800,000 claims. The VA says they have 600,000 claims backlogged. We count appeals and education claims. That's a huge amount of claims that are backlogged."

In Richardson's case, the VA's Winston-Salem regional office informed him in August that he rated as 50 percent disabled as a result of PTSD stemming from the Camp Bucca detainee riot. He was told he would not receive his first disability payment until December 2008 because of the government's recoupment of his separation pay. As explanation for the VA's decision to withhold benefits, the letter stated, "If you are in receipt of separation pay received before October 1, 1996, VA will withhold all the amount the military paid you. After this amount is paid back, you'll start receiving your full VA compensation. "

The Winston-Salem VA acknowledged last week that it had erred in withholding Richardson's disability benefit.

The VA had relied on a provision of federal law that requires veterans who receive disability benefits to return previously received separation pay. The agency overlooked a separate provision that stipulates that separation pay should not be deducted from disability benefits if the separation pay stems from a discharge for an earlier period of service and the disability "is incurred or aggravated during a later period of active duty."

Spokesman Vince Hancock said the VA was redoing Richardson's award and he would likely receive a retroactive payment within 10 days. Hancock said the Winston-Salem VA has a 94 percent accuracy rate, adding that his office would hold a training to remind employees of the provision allowing veterans to receive both separation pay and disability benefits when the payments stem from separate periods of military service.

"I asked, 'Was anybody asleep at the switch?'" Hancock said. "It's not that. We haven't seen a lot of this before. Now, with the global war on terrorism, we are seeing this more often.... It's not unusual that someone would complete a term of service and join the Guard, but prior to the war on terrorism we would often see them perform their reserve duty without being redeployed. Now we're seeing more veterans like Mr. Richardson who reenlist and actually serve in combat."

Danny McDonald, a veteran employment consultant at the NC Employment Security Commission's Greensboro office, said he sees five to 20 veterans a day, about half of whom complain about their benefits being delayed by the VA.

"I really think that it's not fair that you have to wait for your monies after you've put your time in," said McDonald, who is himself a disabled veteran. "When you're in the military, they say, 'Let's get it done, hurry up.' When it comes to us, when we get out they're not hurrying up to give us our benefits.

"I see a lot of stress, whole lot of stress, loneliness, no one to talk to, quick to answer, shy away from a lot of people," McDonald added, "because they're afraid they wouldn't understand."

Richardson said it's hard for him to imagine being employed now; his VA examiner in Winston-Salem noted in July that his PTSD diagnosis indicated that his reliability and productivity were likely reduced and his social functioning moderately impaired. What frightens Richardson the most is his mood swings.

"My wife has tried to understand," he said. "She's gone to counseling sessions. Since the PTSD started she's gone to the vet center. She doesn't like the change in attitude. Sometimes I can catch it. Sometimes I'm just angry. I've changed. I don't sleep anymore. I sleep three or four hours a day [to compensate]. My wife has asked that we resume counseling."

Richardson's service record in Iraq gives the impression of a hard-working and conscientious solider respected by his troops. Today, the soft-voiced veteran presents an image of a meeker version of that. Richardson pursues photography as a hobby, volunteers as a classic-rock DJ at the Guilford College campus radio station, and keeps busy with various projects at the apartment he shares with his wife, who supports the couple on her salary as executive director of the Guilford Community AIDS Partnership.

A narrative for a recommendation for the Bronze Star award describes how Sgt. Richardson coordinated supply operations of consumable and durable goods for a detainee population that expanded from 2,400 to 6,400 in an operation that figured $5.5 million at Camp Bucca. He worked with US contractor Kellogg, Brown and Root and Iraqi vendors.

Richardson's team discovered a circus tent containing more than 2,000 unsecured mattresses at the camp. In addition to stationing a security detail around the mattresses, Richardson assigned his team to unpack them and catalog them. Later, he established an accounting system to track supplies issued to detainees, eliminating the need to rely on the say-so of detainee leaders to gauge the volume of reorders. The Army determined that Richardson's action saved the government $750,000 per year.

The colonel in Baghdad responsible for approving the Bronze Star turned Richardson down for the award, instead issuing him an Army commendation medal.

"Sergeant Richardson is a fine leader respected by his soldiers; he set the example by working hard for long hours with his troops," the narrative states. "He knows his operation and is by far the most knowledgeable person at Camp Bucca in regards to the specific details in managing a Theater Internment Facility supply operation. His actions are in keeping with the finest traditions of military service and reflect distinct credit upon himself, this command and the United States Army."

Following their transfer from Abu Ghraib, detainees - many of them insurgents - revolted at Camp Bucca in January 2005. They set fires, hurled Molotov cocktails and shielded themselves behind mattresses as the US military tried to quell the riot using non-lethal force. When that failed, the soldiers opened fire on the detainees.

"Some detainees lost their lives that day," Richardson said, "I was involved in quelling the riot and I was the person responsible for taking their bodies to the morgue."

Richardson's letter from the Winston-Salem VA confirms Richardson's involvement in putting down the Camp Bucca riot as the combat stressor that likely triggered his PTSD.

"You reported to the examiner that you have been unemployed since leaving the military as you have been unable to obtain a job," the letter states. "You reported panicking during the interview for unknown reasons. You indicated that you have decreased outside social activities, interacting mostly with your wife and child and on occasion outside family or friends."

That Richardson has witnessed death in the combat zone and subsequently received a diagnosis for PTSD hardly makes him unique. The Journal of the American Medical Association study found that more than half of all soldiers who have served in Iraq have witnessed someone being wounded and killed and have themselves felt in danger of being killed. The study found that 40.7 percent of National Guard and Reserve soldiers - twice the rate of their active-duty counterparts - who had been back from Iraq for three to six months had received referrals for mental health concerns or were already under care.

Richardson's VA letter notes that he has experienced ongoing nightmares, flashbacks, exaggerated responses to trauma stimuli, difficulty sleeping at night and concentrating during the daytime, hyper-vigilance and irritability.

"I don't know what went wrong with this war," Richardson said. "I talked to World War II vets yesterday, and they said, 'We had education benefits, we started businesses.' I don't understand it. We don't take care of our veterans anymore."

Richardson is studying political science at Guilford College, and he intends to apply his education to advocacy for returning soldiers who, like him, have run up against hurdles in trying to obtain benefits from the government.

"I'm going to galvanize other veterans," he said. "We're not going to vote for anybody that is not in our interest. I tell young soldiers: 'Vote in '08 because that vote could be a matter of life or death. If we're going to spend upwards of a trillion dollars on this war, then let's spare no cost in taking care of the soldiers."

Arguments of Money Still Holding Up VA Budget

Democrats turn on money tap to help veterans

By Tom Philpott, Special to Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Saturday, November 24, 2007

http://www.estripes .com/article. asp?section= 104&article=50481


Veterans service organizations are thrilled with a $43.1 billion appropriations bill that Congress is set to pass next month for the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The funding level for veterans programs and facilities is almost 20 percent higher than demoralized Republican leaders left behind a year ago. The $6.9 billion increase will allow VA to hire 1,800 more claim processors, beef up medical staffs and modernize long-neglected hospitals and clinics.

“I can’t praise the Democratic leadership enough for what they’ve done with addressing the budget that was handed to them the day they took office,” said Steve Robertson, legislative director for the American Legion.

The 109th Congress adjourned last December without passing a VA appropriations bill. It left the department operating under a “continuing resolution” with VA spending frozen at its fiscal ’06 level.

In taking control of the 110th Congress, Democrats immediately raised VA funding for fiscal 2007 by $3.5 billion. They then turned to veterans groups for guidance on setting the VA budget for ’08.

As usual, four major organizations — Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America and American Veterans (AMVETS) — prepared an “independent budget” to guide lawmakers. The American Legion followed up, also as usual, with its own budget wish list.

But then Democrats last spring did something very unusual. To the delight of advocacy groups, they used the budget guidance from vet groups to set their budget blueprint, making VA funding a clear priority.

“In the 20 years I’ve been working in Washington,” said Robertson, “this is the first time that [Congress] met or exceeded every recommendation that was made by both the Independent Budget and the American Legion. It’s unprecedented.”

It still is too early to access what veterans will gain legislatively this year besides robust VA funding, which is a lock. Committee hearings and reports from special commissions produced many headlines on needed benefit gains. But many of the resulting ideas, from bigger GI Bill benefits to raised disability payments, were controversial and costly. Most likely they won’t win serious consideration from lawmakers until 2008, at the earliest.

Other bills have been endorsed by the veterans’ affairs committees and some have been passed by either the House or the Senate. But their final passage is mired in partisan politics and special interests.

In separate phone interviews before Thanksgiving, Democratic Sens. Daniel Akaka (Hawaii) and Rep. Bob Filner (California) , chairmen of the veterans’ affairs committees, cited the VA funding increases as the clear highlight of their first year holding their committee gavel.

“The key thing is resources have been put in place to do the job,” said Filner. He described a VA health system “stretched to its limit” by an aging veteran population and the special challenges of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injuries.

“Typical for this administration, they weren’t prepared to deal with it,” said Filner, who seldom passes on an opportunity to fire a partisan shot. “Here we are four to five years into the war and they still don’t have enough PTSD people or [experts] to consult on suicide. It’s just ridiculous.” (Nor have they dealt with the backlog of claims for PTSD from Vietnam, thousands of veterans still await claims adjudication. - Rocky)

Both chairmen said they continue to emphasis to colleagues, and to Bush administration officials, that care of veterans must be seen as a “cost of war.” Therefore VA budget increases must be part of any wartime supplemental budget bill passed to fund continued wartime operations.

Though Akaka and Filner helped to secure sharp increases this year in VA funding, they also chair the committees responsible for authorizing new programs and raising current benefits. Their success in that role has been established. Akaka confirmed that two major bills, which were cleared by his committee and are flush with initiatives to improve veterans’ health care and other benefits, might not be enacted until 2008.

The Veterans’ Traumatic Brain Injury and Other Health Programs Improvement Act (S. 1233) would extend the period of eligibility for discharged combat veterans to have swift access to VA health care from two years to five. Veterans who believe they suffer one of the “invisible wounds” of PTSD or brain injury would be guaranteed a mental health exam within 30 days of making a request. The same bill would increase the travel reimbursement rate for veterans commuting long distances to get VA care. It would jump to 28 cents a mile from the 11-cent rate set in 1978. (This is still not adequate, nor is in line with what government officials get for travel which is what veterans should get for travel to and from appointments with the VA. -Rocky))

Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, has put a hold on the bill, however, because of a provision was added after it cleared committee to reopen VA health care to new Priority 8 enrollees. These are veterans with no service-connected disabilities and adequate incomes by government standards.

Akaka and Filner support Priority 8 enrollments. Dan Whiting, Craig’s spokesman, said he opposes reopening VA health care to every veteran “because it would take resources away from returning injured veterans.”

Craig also is blocking the Veterans Benefits Enhancement Act (S. 1315) which would improve veterans’ life insurance, adaptable housing and other benefits. What he opposes in this bill is language to give service pensions to Filipino veterans of World War II. Craig argues the pensions are too generous and they would be paid with dollars earmarked to provide a special monthly pension for elderly and housebound U.S. veterans.

Akaka and Filner pushed the Filipino pension provision through committee. Both have large Filipino populations among their constituencies.

Whiting said Craig is talking with Akaka about a possible compromise.

Shocking News!

Graphics by Doc

By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY

At least 20,000 U.S. troops who were not classified as wounded during combat in Iraq and Afghanistan have been found with signs of brain injuries, according to military and veterans records compiled by USA TODAY.

The data, provided by the Army, Navy and Department of Veterans Affairs, show that about five times as many troops sustained brain trauma as the 4,471 officially listed by the Pentagon through Sept. 30. These cases also are not reflected in the Pentagon's official tally of wounded, which stands at 30,327.

The number of brain-injury cases were tabulated from records kept by the VA and four military bases that house units that have served multiple combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan.

One base released its count of brain injuries at a medical conference. The others provided their records at the request of USA TODAY, in some cases only after a Freedom of Information Act filing was submitted.

The data came from:

• Landstuhl Army Regional Medical Center in Germany, where troops evacuated from Iraq and Afghanistan for injury, illness or wounds are brought before going home. Since May 2006, more than 2,300 soldiers screened positive for brain injury, hospital spokeswoman Marie Shaw says.

• Fort Hood, Texas, home of the 4th Infantry Division, which returned from a second Iraq combat tour late last year. At least 2,700 soldiers suffered a combat brain injury, Lt. Col. Steve Stover says.

• Fort Carson, Colo., where more than 2,100 soldiers screened were found to have suffered a brain injury, according to remarks by Army Col. Heidi Terrio before a brain injury association seminar.

• Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, where 1,737 Marines were found to have suffered a brain injury, according to Navy Cmdr. Martin Holland, a neurosurgeon with the Naval Medical Center San Diego.

• VA hospitals, where Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been screened for combat brain injuries since April. The VA found about 20% of 61,285 surveyed — or 11,804 veterans — with signs of brain injury, spokeswoman Alison Aikele says. VA doctors say more evaluation is necessary before a true diagnosis of brain injury can be confirmed in all these cases, Aikele says.

Soldiers and Marines whose wounds were discovered after they left Iraq are not added to the official casualty list, says Army Col. Robert Labutta, a neurologist and brain injury consultant for the Pentagon.

"We are working to do a better job of reflecting accurate data in the official casualty table," Labutta says.

Most of the new cases involve mild or moderate brain injuries, commonly from exposure to blasts.

More than 150,000 troops may have suffered head injuries in combat, says Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., founder of the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force.

"I am wary that the number of brain-injured troops far exceeds the total number reported injured," he says.

About 1.5 million troops have served in Iraq, where traumatic brain injury can occur despite heavy body armor worn by troops.

On Iraq, a State of Denial

On Iraq, a State of Denial

Washington Post
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, November 23, 2007

It does not have the drama of the Inchon landing or the sweep of the Union comeback in the summer of 1864. But the turnabout of American fortunes in Iraq over the past several months is of equal moment -- a war seemingly lost, now winnable. The violence in Iraq has been dramatically reduced. Political allegiances have been radically reversed. The revival of ordinary life in many cities is palpable. Something important is happening.

And what is the reaction of the war critics? Nancy Pelosi stoutly maintains her state of denial, saying this about the war just two weeks ago: "This is not working. . . We must reverse it." A euphemism for "abandon the field," which is what every Democratic presidential candidate is promising, with variations only in how precipitous to make the retreat.

How do they avoid acknowledging the realities on the ground? By asserting that we have not achieved political benchmarks -- mostly legislative actions by the Baghdad government -- that were set months ago. And that these benchmarks are paramount. And that all the current progress is ultimately vitiated by the absence of centrally legislated national reconciliation.

I can understand Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the No. 2 commander in Iraq, saying that the central government needs to seize the window provided by the surge to achieve political reconciliation. We would all love to have the leaders of the various factions -- Kurd, Shiite and Sunni -- sign nice pieces of paper tying up all the knotty questions of federalism, de-Baathification and oil revenue.

What commander would not want such a silver bullet that would obviate the need for any further ground action? But it is not going to happen for the same reason it has not already happened: The Maliki government is too sectarian and paralyzed to be able to end the war in a stroke of reconciliation.

But does the absence of this deus ex machina invalidate our hard-won gains? Why does this mean that we cannot achieve success by other means?

Sure, there is no oil law. But the central government is nonetheless distributing oil revenue to the provinces, where the funds are being used for reconstruction.

Sure, the de-Baathification law has not been modified. But the whole purpose of modification was to entice Sunni insurgents to give up the insurgency and join the new order. This is already happening on a widening scale all over the country in the absence of a relaxed de-Baathification law.

As for federalism, the Kurds are running their own region, the Sunni sheiks in Anbar and elsewhere are exercising not just autonomy but control of their own security, and the southern Shiites are essentially governing themselves, the British having withdrawn in all but name.

Yes, a provincial powers law would be nice because it would allow for provincial elections. We should push hard for it. But we already have effective provincial and tribal autonomy in pivotal regions of the country.

Why is top-down national reconciliation as yet unattainable? Because decades of Saddam Hussein's totalitarianism followed by the brutality of the post-invasion insurgency destroyed much of Iraq's political infrastructure, causing Iraqis to revert to the most basic political attachment -- tribe and locality. Gen. David Petraeus's genius has been to adapt American strategy to capitalize on that development, encouraging the emergence of and allying ourselves with tribal and provincial leaders -- without waiting for cosmic national deliverance from the newly constructed and still dysfunctional constitutional apparatus in Baghdad.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq is in disarray, the Sunni insurgency in decline, the Shiite militias quiescent, the capital city reviving. Are we now to reverse course and abandon all this because parliament cannot ratify the reconciliation already occurring on the ground?

Do the critics forget their own arguments about the irrelevance of formal political benchmarks? The transfer of power in 2004. The two elections in 2005. The ratification of the constitution. Those were all supposed to be turning points to pacify the country and bring stability -- all blown to smithereens by the Samarra bombing in February 2006, which precipitated an orgy of sectarian violence and a descent into civil war.

So, just as we have learned this hard lesson of the disconnect between political benchmarks and real stability, the critics now claim the reverse -- that benchmarks are what really count.

This is to fundamentally mistake ends and means. The benchmarks would be a wonderful shortcut to success in Iraq. But it is folly to abandon the pursuit of that success when a different route, more arduous but still doable, is at hand and demonstrably working.

My opinion, for what it is worth is Stay The Course!

Second Family Thanksgiving Dinner

Graphics by Doc

Brother/Sister to Brother/Sister the experiences of war create bonds that will never be forgotten. That is what this picture means to me and to many who have experienced war.

Soldiers Gather with ''Second Family'' for Holiday Meal

Friday, 23 November 2007
By Pfc. April Campbell
Multi-National Division - Baghdad PAO


Capt. Katina Sutton, commander of the Command Post Detachment, Division Special Troops Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division, serves Thanksgiving dinner to Soldiers in the Pegasus dining facility at Camp Liberty in western Baghdad, Nov. 22. Several "First Team" officers and senior noncommissioned officers took part in serving the meal to Soldiers in the DFAC. U.S.

CAMP LIBERTY -- The line into the Pegasus dining facility was longer than usual at lunchtime on Thanksgiving Day this year. Soldiers waited patiently for what might be the finest meal they eat during their deployment here.

While Soldiers were unable to eat with their families back home, many seemed to find comfort in dining with their fellow Soldiers.

New York native, Pfc. Denis Anton, a personnel administrative clerk with the 401st Military Police Company, 92nd MP Battalion, 18th MP Brigade, arrived early with two friends to be the first people into the DFAC for the meal.

He said they often just grab a to-go box for lunch, but for Thanksgiving they wanted to sit down and eat together. In the absence of his family at home, those he lives and works with have become more like family than just coworkers, Anton said.

When the DFAC opened at 11 a.m., Soldiers were served everything from ham to sweet potato casserole by 'First Team' officers and senior noncommissioned officers, many wearing their Stetsons to the event.

Soldiers, such as Anaheim, Calif., native, Spc. Marcos Luevanos, a cavalry scout with the 1st Squadron, 75th Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, appeared to leave the dining facility having had a positive Thanksgiving Day experience. The meal was an opportunity for him and his friends to eat good food, relax, and joke around, said Marcos.

While nothing can match eating Thanksgiving dinner at home with his family, the food was tasty, the line did not take too long and it was nice to eat with his Soldiers, said Sgt. 1st Class Jesus Encinas, an intelligence cell NCOIC with Company C, 2nd Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division.

For Encinas, a Naco, Ariz., native, eating Thanksgiving dinner with other Soldiers was actually a taste of home.

''The Soldiers I ate my meal with today were single, and I would have invited them to eat Thanksgiving dinner at my home if we were at Fort Hood,'' he said. ''The Army is supposed to be like family. It was eating Thanksgiving dinner with my second family.''


Sometimes your closest family is not of blood ties.

Vets For Freedom

Graphic by Doc


Dear Vets for Freedom Members,

Tonight I will be appearing on The O’Reilly Factor during the 8:00pm EST hour on the Fox News Channel. As you may be aware, Brian De Palma’s new film, Redacted, is now playing in selected movie theatres across the country. Funded primarily by Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, this film takes an unfortunate, yet isolated, event and tries to paint all American service members as criminals.

The event on which the film is loosely based (actions taken by 5 soldiers in Mahmudiyah on March 12, 2006) are inexcusable and the perpetrators have been subjugated to swift punishment under American and Military law. But as we all know, their actions are far from the norm. The brave men and women who proudly wear our nation’s uniform are among the brightest, most-disciplined individuals this country has to offer and follow a strict moral code of conduct. As Bill O’Reilly has rightly stated, this film serves no other purpose but to demean American soldiers who are risking their lives to protect our freedoms.

I look forward to appearing on The O’Reilly Factor this evening to join with veteran organizations from around the country in confronting those who demean the very troops who provide the umbrella of freedom that Mr. De Palma and Mr. Cuban use to produce this false propaganda. But I cannot go about this alone. As proud Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, we have a responsibility to stand up to films such as Redacted, and educate all Americans about the honor, pride and dignity that comes with wearing the uniform. Therefore, I ask all American patriots to join Vets for Freedom, along with other veterans organizations, in boycotting this senseless film. Please visit our site, in addition to boycottredacted.com and gatheringofeagles.org for more information on what you can do.

Please visit our site to see the print advertisement that Vets for Freedom ran in Friday’s Variety newspaper. Variety is Hollywood’s daily publication, and we wanted to make sure Hollywood knew how we felt about this film.

With a unified voice, we can send a clear message to Mr. De Palma and Mr. Cuban, letting them know that most Americans know the truth about the United States Armed Forces and don’t appreciate their anti-war agenda.

Move Out and Draw Fire!

Pete Hegseth
Iraq War Veteran
Executive Director, Vets for Freedom