Thursday, March 01, 2007

My father retired from the U.S. Army after serving for 25 years that included two tours of duty in Vietnam. There is one topic that always gets him frustrated and angry: the situation our soldiers face when they return from serving overseas, from Vietnam then or Iraq-Afghanistan now.

The truth is that we are failing those who have served America. It is utterly shameful, and we must demand that the federal government take action.

Health care is the most pressing problem for veterans. Recently, the Washington Post reported on the living conditions of disabled veterans housed at Walter Reed Medical Center. Some have been living in rooms infested by mice, cockroaches and mold.

What does it say about our government that those who were seriously injured while fighting under the U.S. flag overseas return only to be placed in dirty, contaminated hospital rooms? It says either that the administration is incompetent or that its priorities are elsewhere. History can decide which is the case, but a solution must be immediately found.

Furthermore, better medical technology has saved more soldiers than ever from wartime injuries – a fantastic change for which we are all grateful. However, this has increased the numbers of troops surviving with major head and spinal injuries, amputations, nerve damage and burns. Mental health issues have increased, too, with roughly 30 percent of veterans reporting problems with their mental health within 3-4 months of returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

A Harvard University study recently estimated that the long-term costs of taking care of Iraq war veterans will be somewhere between $300 billion and $700 billion, with 263,000 troops projected to need treatment next year alone. We have promised these services to our veterans, and leaders in Washington had better be prepared to pay when the bill comes due.

Unemployment is also problem for returning soldiers. Veterans 20 to 24 years old are unemployed at a rate of over 10 percent. While this number has thankfully declined in recent months, it is still more than twice that of the overall national unemployment rate of 4.6 percent. A main reason for this problem is that service members injured in Iraq and Afghanistan are in the early stages of their careers and have not gained the opportunity to learn job skills or gain civilian work experience. We need to provide these men and women opportunities to find well-paying jobs.

While homelessness is a known issue, the Department of Veterans Affairs estimates a total of 400,000 military veterans were homeless over the course of 2006. In addition, a new issue has emerged: The Pentagon estimates that more than 16,000 single mothers have been sent to Iraq and Afghanistan. The provision of care and support for these mothers and their children becomes a difficult problem to solve, since parental status does not give special dispensation for being deployed.

Given all of these issues, how is our government reacting? The answer is frightening: budget cuts. After an increase for the next fiscal year, the Bush Administration plans on cutting the Veterans Administration budget in 2009 and 2010 and freezing it thereafter. Whether this is serious or merely smoke and mirrors masking a deficit-ridden budget, the message is clear. Funding for the Veterans Administration is on the chopping block, highlighting the enormous gap between this administration’s rhetoric about supporting those who serve and its actions.

Here, the situation is already difficult for those wishing to use VA services. Though there are regional clinics, New Mexico has just one VA hospital. Located in Albuquerque, it has only 217 beds. VA waiting lists are becoming normal. If funding is cut further, will New Mexico’s disabled veterans have to travel further and wait longer to get the services they need?

But budget cuts for the VA are not the only assault being made on veterans. Last year, the Bush Administration tried to raise fees and co-payments for Tri-Care, the program that military retirees rely on until they become Medicare-eligible at 65. The proposal failed, but it showed again problems associated with rising health care costs for our nation’s uniformed services.

Though there are many similarities between the Vietnam conflict and our current war, there is one positive difference. In spite of the vast difference in public opinion about this war itself, our men and women in uniform have been embraced by everyone in America. This is commendable, but praise and respect only go so far. When our veterans sacrifice their time, their families and their lives to protect us, we need to take care of them when they return. Not doing so is dishonorable and morally weak.

Our legislators and the president need to shoulder the burden of providing for our veterans and military retirees. It is our duty to remind them not to forget this responsibility.

6 Comments:

Blogger Unknown said...

I listened to a speech from a former congressman where he preached how bad the Republicans are in communicating there message to their base and to the public, and how the public does not know anything about what the republicans got done in the 109th congress. And while he was going on about the issues that the Republicans got done, he was also talking about the "earmarks". He explained to the conservative crowd, that "earmarks are les than one tenth of a percent of the federal budget" witch is a stunning fact that makes me wonder why this is the concern of our time in the conservative community.

As he finished his speech, I walked up to him and told him "Mr. Congressman, I might be wrong but I recall reading an article in the Wall St. Journal, about an official in CO criticizing an earmark that Sen. Allard (R-CO) inserted in a spending bill, saying that it takes away the money the State gets from the federal government." So I asked the Hon. Congressman "Is it true that when a congressman or senator inserts an earmark in a spending bill, he does not raise spending? That he just takes away the liberty from one bureaucrat to decide how to spend the money and decides himself where the money should go?"

The answer was yes.

So if earmarks do not raise spending and it's not more then one tenth of one percent of the budget, why is there so much noise about it?

Because we do not communicate, and nobody amongst us is aware of the facts. We have to start communicating, and shouldn't be afraid that someone will slam us, because if you fight back, you have a chance of winning, and if you don’t fight you don’t even have a chance of winning.

9:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for the Posting on veteran health care. Like your father I too am a Vietnam veteran. I have two seperate 100% VA Service Connected Disability ratings. Here is my opinion of VA health care. It stinks! And is dangerous to use.

I will no longer allow any VA Doctor to touch me. I only use the VA to fill prescriptions which they sometimes get right.

VA health care was never up to acceptable standards. And it has gotten much worse under stewardship of Bush appointee Jim Nicholson the present VA Secretary.

Nicholson is a hired gun "cost cutter" sent into the VA by the Bush administration to do one thing only. Cut costs. At any price to the veterans the VA is supposed to serve.

Even prior to the Bush presidency the VA was dirty, disorganized and an option of last resort only for most veterans. Under Nicholson it has become a true death trap.

If you think I exagerate ask your father. He is a Vietnam vet like me. And I will wager that just like me he would never trust the VA for ANY sort of health care. If VA health care were as good aqs Bush and Nicholson and our own good Congressman Stevan Pearce tell us it is wouldn't we see some of Congressmen getting care there? I have never heard of any elected official trusting their own health care or care for their families to the VA system they asll say is so great.

All the BILLIONS and BILLIONS of $$$ eaten up by the VA are wasted on real estate holdings and cushy over paid jobs for VA employees. Who all think they are far too important to ever actually provide care for a veteran.

90% of the people sucking up tax dollars on the VA pay roll have some sort of administrative "position." Very few actually provide care to veterasns. They just go to meetings and conventions and do public relations (BS) jobs to snow the tax payers about where all the money goes.

Most of my friends are disabled Vietnam vets. I don't know anyone of them who would actually trust the VA to perform any sort of medical procedure if there was any other choice of providers at all.

I have spent time in both Mexican jails and in VA health care facilities. I feel much safer and better cared for in a Mexican jail than in the VA facilities.

Ask your Dad.

Ron Nesler

And of the remaining 10%

3:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is nothing more despicable than somebody pretending to care about veterans but never having served in the armed forces. These prognosticators of righteousness tend to be nothing more than overinflated liberal egomaniacs. The truth is Democrats hate the president, hate the military, and hate capitalism in America. They only pretend to care when it is politically expedient. My dad also served in the military. Twenty years and 3 tours in Vietnam. Not officer, but enlisted. McCamley talks about healthcare for our Veterans, but where was this before the Walter Reed story. He is just using this issue for political points trying to paint the Bush administration in a negative light. What a crock. McCamley, get a life, become a Republican, and pick up a rifle and fight.

2:02 PM  
Blogger Saac said...

Anonymous,
Your speculations as to Mr. McCamleys character are childish at best. No, McCamley was not in the military. However, McCamleys high respect for veterans and the armed forces predates his political career. This is evident in his participation at the Bataan Death March each year. The next time you leave a narrow minded and ignorant comment please do your research.

5:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Bill....
What are you going to do if you get elected into office? I have seen what you have done, what are your visions for NM?

3:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous,

To imply that all military members are republican is pure ignorance. I served and was in fact very recently discharged. I served one combat tour in Iraq. I am a member of the Democratic party, as were MANY of my fellow Soldiers beside me.

We do not pick and choose our wars. We depended on the public to elect righteous and honest leaders that will not use us unjustly and put us in harms way unnecessarily.

The military has been failed, and is continuing to be failed. I received a discharge for a service-connected disability and removed from a combat theatre. I was offered no post-combat care when I returned and STILL have not been. I was rushed out the door. I am trying to use the system provided for care and it continues to fail me. I filed a VA claim 3 months ago and am still patiently waiting.

I appreciate Mr. McCamley addressing this issue and look forward to him tackling issues such as these as Las Cruces Representative in Washington.

8:48 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home