Printable View
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/20...ampaign=buffer
apparently this shit had been warned about since 2008, and only learned of this problem through CNN's report lol. way to be on top of your shit. if an administrator has to learn about administrative problems through the media, he's an awful executive
Was wondering if boutons had any articles he could spam on the issue?
Why Is the VA Suffering From a Lack of Resources in the First Place?
Why is the VA suffering from a lack of resources? You can find the answer on Capitol Hill. Insufficient funding of veterans’ healthcare has been caused primarily by political decisions made by “support-our-troops” members of the US Senate and House of Representatives. Members of Congress who have in recent years voted against increasing the funding of veterans’ healthcare—increases necessary to meet the need created by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—deserve much of the blame for starving the VA into this scandalous situation.
Many of those members of Congress who are now calling for the resignation of Gen. Shinseki are themselves guilty of voting against adequate funding for veterans’ healthcare, and they are therefore partly responsible for the deaths of veterans who didn’t get necessary medical treatment quickly enough to save their lives. It is just as reasonable to call for their resignations as it is to call for Gen. Shinseki’s resignation, if not more so. If you’re truly outraged, then tell your member of Congress to cough up the necessary funds for the VA. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs can only ask for increased funding; it’s up to Congress to actually provide it.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/179961/why-va-suffering-lack-resources-first-place
2003
January 2003 Bush Administration cuts off veterans’ health care for 164,000. In January, the Administration cut off VA health care for 164,000 veterans without service-connected disabilities, who make as little as $25,000 a year. Through 2005 this has denied health care to more than 522,000 veterans. [68 Fed. Reg. 2670, 2671, January 17, 2003]
March 2003 Republicans vote to slash veterans’ health care. House Republicans voted in their budget to cut $14 billion from veterans’ health care. The GOP budget also included the President’s proposal to impose a $250 fee for enrollment in VA health care for low and moderate income veterans, along with a doubling of the drug co-payment for those veterans. [H Con. Res 95, Vote #82, 3/21/03]
July 2003 Republicans break promise on veterans’ health care. After agreeing to reduce some of their budget cuts, the House GOP reneged on their promise to increase funding for VA health care and passed an appropriations bill providing $1.8 billion less than their FY 2004 Budget. [H. Res. 338, Vote #450, 7/25/03]
October 2003 Democrats seek an additional $1.3 billion for veterans health care, but Republicans reject it. The Bush Administration opposed and House Republicans rejected a Democratic motion to include $1.3 billion for veterans’ health care in the Iraqi Supplemental. [H.R. 3289, Vote #600,10/31/03]
2004
February 2, 2004 Veterans Secretary acknowledges inadequacy of FY 2005 Veteran Budget: "In a rare move by a Cabinet member, Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi told a House committee he had sought $1.2 billion more than President Bush was willing to put in his budget. 'I asked OMB for $1.2 billion more than I received,' Principi said...Last year, Principi said the administration did not provide as large of an increase as he requested for the 2004 fiscal year."- Associated Press, 2/4/04
February 26, 2004 Bipartisan House Veterans’ Committee calls for an additional $2.5 billion funding for veterans health care.
March 25, 2004 Democrats seek to amend the budget both in committee and on the floor to add money. Republicans defeated – by a vote of 194 to 232 (Democrats votes YES) – the Democratic substitute to the GOP FY 2005 Budget Resolution to include a $2.5 billion increase over the Bush budget for veterans' health care for FY 2005, which veterans critically needed to maintain the current level of veterans' health care services. [H.Con.Res. 393, Vote #91, 3/25/04. Rejected 194-232 (R 0-224; D 193-8)]
March 25, 2004 Republicans pass inadequate budget resolution that shortchanged veterans' health care by $1.3 billion, compared to the amount the bipartisan Veterans’ Affair Committee said was needed just to maintain current services. [H.Con.Res. 393, Vote #92, 3/25/04 .Adopted 215-212 (R 215-10; D 0-201)]
June 24, 2004 Democrats offer “National Priorities” Bill to increase veterans’ health care by $1.3 billion. Republicans defeated an “investing in national priorities” bill that would have invested in key priorities, providing an additional $1.3 billion to improve veterans' health care, shorten waiting times at VA health care facilities, and provide critical mental health services to address needs resulting from wartime deployments. The Paralyzed Veterans of America called this bill "vital," as it would have brought veterans’ health care funding to the level that the House Veterans' Affairs Committee on a bipartisan basis had said was needed to maintain current services. [H.Res. 685, Vote #301, 6/24/04. Rejected 184-230 (R 2-217; D 181-13)]
September 29, 2004 Democrats offer motion to add veterans’ health money to Fiscal Year 2005 Continuing Resolution. Republicans defeated the Democratic motion to provide an additional $1.3 billion for veterans' health care for FY 2005, which veterans critically need to maintain the current level of veterans' health care services. [H.J.Res. 107, Vote #478, 9/29/04. Rejected 200-221 (R 1-219; D 198-2)]
2005
January 6, 2005 House Republicans oust Chris Smith as chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs for his tireless advocacy of veterans rights. "It all came down to the fact I wanted to spend too much on veterans," Smith said following a 90-minute meeting in which he detailed the 22 laws he authored to help veterans in his four years as chairman. .. "This is not only a slap at Chris Smith, but a shot over the bow at veterans organizations," said Richard Fuller of the Paralyzed Veterans of America. "The Republican leadership has made a statement that the country is making too much of a commitment to the men and women who have served in uniform." [New Jersey Star-Ledger, January 06, 2005]
February 16, 2005 Despite news reports of VA shortfalls, newly appointed VA Secretary and former Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson testifies that he is unaware of that VAs are deferring purchases and maintenance to address shortfalls.
February 17 House Democrats, led by Reps. Baird and Hooley, send a letter to the President urging him to support including $1.3 billion for veterans health care in the Iraqi Supplemental.
February 23, 2005 House Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Buyer supports increasing veterans co-pays and imposing health enrollment fees for in the budget views and estimates.
March 15, 2005 Republicans vote to block Democrats from offering an amendment add $1.2 billion for veterans’ health care for FY 2005 on the $82 billion Iraqi Supplemental offered by Rep. Darlene Hooley (D-OR). [H.R. 1248, Vote #69, 3/15/05. Motion agreed to 220-195 (R 220-1; D 0-193)]
March 15, 2005 Republicans blocked consideration of an amendment by Rep. Bob Filner to add $3.1 billion for veterans’ healthcare in FY 2005. [H.R. 1248, Vote #71, 3/15/05. Motion agreed to 224-200 (R 220-1; D 0-193)]
March 17, 2005 Democrats make repeated efforts on the budget to add money in committee and on the floor on the FY 2006 Budget. Democratic Rep. Obey of Wisconsin attempted to offer an amendment to provide $3.2 billion more than the President’s budget in FY 2006 for veterans' health care, to meet the growing needs of returning soldiers, The Democratic budget included a $20.9 billion increase over 5 years, for veterans’ health care and to eliminate the President’s proposal to increase fees. Similarly, Democratic Rep. Chet Edwards offered an amendment in to increase health care funding and to eliminate the Republican budget's plan for $798 million in veterans cuts over five years. [H CON RES 95, Votes #82 & 87, 3/17/05]
March 17, 2005 Republicans pass a budget that is more than $2 billion short of what is needed for veterans’ health care this year, cuts veterans’ health care by $14 billion below the amount needed to maintain these programs at their current levels over five year, and cuts of $798 million over the next five years – requiring either new fees for veterans’ health care or cuts in veterans’ benefits. [H CON RES 95, Vote #88, 3/17/05]
April 5, 2005 Bush Administration denies any funding shortfall. On April 5, 2005, the Veterans’ Affairs Department Secretary Nicholson said “I can assure you that VA does not need emergency supplemental funds in FY 2005 to continue to provide timely, quality service…” [Con. Rec. 4/12/05, S3466]
May 18, 2005 Democratic Rep. Obey offered an amendment in full committee to increase VA health care spending by $2.6 billion in FY 2006, but Republicans defeated it.
May 26, 2005 House Republicans block consideration of a Democratic amendment to provide an additional $2.6 billion for veterans’ health care in FY 2006, supported by the coalition of AMVETS, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans, and Veterans of Foreign Wars. [H.R.2528, Vote #223, 5/26/05. Motion passed 223-194 (R 223-0; D 0-193)]
June 23, 2005 Bush Administration acknowledges FY 2005 shortfall of $1 billion, even though they have been aware of this since April. “The Bush administration, already accused by veterans groups of seeking inadequate funds for health care next year, acknowledged yesterday that it is short $1 billion for covering current needs at the Department of Veterans Affairs this year…Leaders of the American Legion, the Paralyzed Veterans and the Disabled American Veterans all noted a striking partisan division in Congress on veterans issues, with Democrats giving them much more support than Republicans.” [Washington Post, 6/24/05]
June 24, 2005 House Democrats, led by Rep. Chet Edwards, seek to offer an amendment to eliminate the Republican VA funding shortfall by adding $1 billion for VA health care in FY 2005 to the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations bill. The Republican majority refused to allow the amendment, so Congressman David Obey of Wisconsin then offered a motion to send the bill back and add the needed funding for veterans' health care. [HR 3010, Vote #320, 6/24/05. Failed 185-216]
June 28, 2005 Bush Administration acknowledges FY 2006 shortfall that amounts to $2.7 billion. Secretary Nicholson acknowledged that there is also a shortfall of $1.5 FY 2006 – which would reach $2.7 billion in fiscal 2006 if the Administration proposals are rejected, as they have been over the past few years. Secretary still refuses to acknowledge that the shortfall is hurting veterans access to timely, high quality care.
June 28, 2005 Republicans reject Democratic attempt to make up for the shortfall in the House. House Republicans voted to block consideration of an amendment by Rep. Chet Edwards to add $1 billion for VA health care in FY 2005 to the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. [HR 3057, Vote # 325, 6/28/05. Failed 217-189]
June 28, 2005 Veterans Secretary Nicholson says “We certainly don’t have a crisis.” [NYT, 6/29/05]
June 28, 2005 Majority Leader Tom Delay said, “Veterans need to know, no veteran will be without their health care in 2005 and no veteran will be without health care in 2006. There are solutions to this problem and those solutions are being addressed.” [CQ Today, 6/28/05]
June 29, 2005 Rep. Edwards introduces an amendment to the Transportation Appropriations bill to add $1 billion for VA health care but Republicans block it from consideration.
June 29, 2005 All House Democrats send a letter to President Bush urging him to send up a budget request for $1.3 billion to make up for the shortfall this year.
June 29, 2005 The Senate votes 96 to 0 to add $1.5 billion for FY 2005 for veterans health care.
June 30, 2005 Several months after becoming aware of the shortfall and more than one week after acknowledging a shortfall, the White House and House Republicans begrudgingly act to deal with the current year shortfall in veterans’ health care, passing only $975 million – significantly less than the Senate passed – thereby delaying funding for veterans’ health care. Democrats attempt to bring the total of the supplemental to $1.5 billion to match the Senate amount, but Republicans reject this effort to get the money to veteran’s medical facilities immediately on a party line vote. [H RES 345 Vote #359, 6/30/05. Motion agreed to 216-191 (R 216-0; D 0-191)] So final action for this year’s shortfall is not completed as Congress adjourns for the July 4th recess.
July 12, 2005 Just two weeks after announcing the shortfall for FY05, the Bush Administration admits their numbers were wrong and requests an additional $300 million for FY05, bringing the total shortfall to about $1.3 billion, matching the number Democrats have been calling for all along.
July 12, 2005 The Senate again votes 96 to 0 to add $1.5 billion for FY 2005 for veterans health care.
July 14, 2005 The Bush Administration formally requests the additional $300 million this year, along with $1.7 billion for FY 2006 – admitting a $3 billion mistake over the two years, but still leaving veterans health care $1.5 billion short in the upcoming year.
July 14, 2005 OMB Director Bolten testifies that “There have been three consecutive years preceding this one in which more there was more money requested by the Administration and more money appropriated by the Congress for the medical care portion of veterans services than was actually needed in that year. The appropriations have exceeded the VA medical care needs in the preceding three years by over half a billion dollars in each of the receding three years. “ (testimony before the House Budget Committee)
July 18, 2005 Senate Democratic Leader Reid ask to bring up legislation to provide $1.5 billion for veterans health care in FY 2005 separately, but Republicans objected.
July 28, 2005 35 Days after White House acknowledges shortfall, House passes legislation providing $1.5 billion for veterans health care in FY 2005, finally getting the money to the VA.
October 26, 2005 It is reported that the Republican Chairman of the Budget Committee has proposed a two percent cut in all programs, including veterans’ health care. This would cut more than $600 million in veterans’ health care -- enough funds to care for nearly 100,000 veterans. The American Legion expressed concern that this cut would mean “...rationing of care, hiring freezes of medical personnel, delaying repairs on facilities, growing backlogs of medical equipment, and many other fiscal-based constraints.” And Senate Republicans have proposed a five percent cut, which would slash veterans health care by $1.6 billion, the amount needed to care for 243,000 veterans. And now, the President agrees that “I'm open to a further across-the-board spending cut as well." (Reuters, 10/26/05)
November 10, 2005 Disabled American Veterans and many other Veterans groups begin announcing concern and consternation that Republican Veterans Affairs Committee
Chairman Buyer (R-IN) recently announced that veterans service organizations will no longer have the opportunity to present testimony before a joint hearing of the House and Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committees. “The tradition of legislative presentations by veterans service organizations dates back to at least the 1950s. And the timing of this announcement -- just before Veterans Day -- could not have been worse,” said DAV National Commander Paul W. Jackson. For several decades now, these joint hearings have been held each year to allow the elected leaders of veterans groups to discuss their organization’s legislative agenda and foremost concerns with the lawmakers who have jurisdiction over federal veterans programs. Senators and Representatives who serve on those committees also get the rare opportunity to address the hundreds of constituent members from these organizations’ who make the annual pilgrimage to Capitol Hill.
November 15, 2005 House Democratic Leaders hold roundtable with Veterans and Veterans representatives to continue dialogue and work on passing the New GI Bill of Rights, ending the SBP/DIC Offset, fully funding Veterans Health care, fully ending the Disabled Veterans Tax, providing TRICARE to National Guard and Reservist along with many other issues of importance to America’s Veterans and Military Retirees. Democrats are listening and working with Veterans.
http://www.vfvs.com/Veterans_WeWillNotBeTalkedDown.html
bitch, be slapped
There you go :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
How the Media’s VA ‘Scandal’ Coverage Is Making the Same Old Mistakes
However, as more and more of the VA story has emerged, it’s increasingly clear that a credulous press corps has once again allowed political grandstanding and dubious claims to run ahead of actual evidence. First and foremost among these failings, the CNN whistleblower’s disturbing claim of forty veterans dying, which has already begun to fray. In fact, as of last Thursday, a VA Inspector General had reviewed seventeen of those supposedly fatal cases and ruled out wait times as contributing to their deaths in every one of them. Reputable news outlets, like NPR, have been careful to couch these death claims as “not yet been proved.” But still today, reports among some of the usual right-wing suspects haven’t been so diligent; the slippery “as many as forty veterans died” meme has now been firmly entrenched in the narrative.
As is often the case when news organizations indulge in flood-the-zone coverage, much of the reporting has a parachuted-in feel to it. As a result, a lot of what readers and viewers have gotten is a very narrow view of the VA, with little background on the Obama administration’s overall track record serving the veteran community.
For example, few reporters bother to note the great strides made by the VA in the past few years in shrinking a massive claims backlog. (That backlog—which Obama inherited, by the way—further ballooned in late 2010 after the White House decided to finally do right by thousands of Vietnam veterans and accept more claims for PTSD and Agent Orange exposure.)
Nor has much attention been paid to the administration’s striking success in reducing the chronic problem of veteran homelessness, which has been cut by twenty-four percent since 2010.
And if the central issue under scrutiny right now is a healthcare system’s inability to match its supply with patient demand, might it be worthwhile context to note that the VA will be serving one million more patients by 2015 than it did when Obama first came into office?
But rare is the news story that rounds out its scandal focus with a look at the broader challenges facing the VA. Even when I come across a well-reported, nuanced story about the agency’s recent ups and downs, I have to get past an oversimplified, scandal-hyped headline to do it: “Obama Has Every Reason to Fix the VA. Why Hasn’t He?”
Perhaps inevitably, the DC press corps’ fetish for horserace coverage has also crept in. Over at the National Journal sister site, Defense One, we saw even less context and more shoddy narrative framing this past week. With a shameless, clickbait headline, it ran a story suggesting that the “VA scandal” could be worse than—wait for it—Benghazi! Of course, the “veteran Democratic strategist” quoted saying this is no doubt only a “veteran” of political campaigns, since he refers to the VA as the “Veterans Administration,” a name the agency hasn’t officially had for twenty-five years. Not to worry, the reporter makes the same mistake. Though the story at least hedges “veterans dying” as an allegation, there’s no mention of the VA IG investigation that has also so far disproven all those claims. And then, true to form, the reporter devotes the kicker paragraph to the potential impact of those alleged dead veterans on the Democrats’ chances in the midterm elections. Classy.
As the coverage of the VA’s problems began to coalesce, right on cue, right-wingers jumped on board with their own agenda to push. Just how obviously political has the issue become? Consider the transparent absurdity of this PR two-step from last week. On Thursday, a group called the Concerned Veterans of America demanded the “immediate resign[ation]” of VA Undersecretary of Health Dr. Robert Petzel as retribution for the agency’s problems. Not even twenty-four hours later, however, the same group dismissed Petzel’s actual resignation as a “meaningless gesture.” Such transparently phony behavior on the part of the CVA might come as less of a shock when you learn it has received $2 million of its funding through the dark money network of the Koch brothers.
Conservative outrage artists like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh have wasted no time either. They’ve already used the VA as an excuse to, respectively, revisit the Obamacare “death panels” canard and compare the VA backlog to Nazi genocide. Never mind that all their railing about the poor quality of “government-run healthcare” is a lie. As with Medicare, VA care is among the best in the country. It’s better administration and greater access to that care that are the issues that need fixing at the VA. Gee, I wonder how conservatives feel about putting more resources into the VA to do just that.
Surprise, surprise, they’re against it. Back in February, the Senate GOP killed a $21-billion funding bill that would have opened or expanded more than two-dozen VA medical centers. The reason? It was an “election-year ploy” by Democrats that cost too much.
(It seems there is a connection between the VA and Benghazi stories after all, since Congressional Republicans repeatedly cut funding for embassy security in the years before the 2012 attack on our compound in Libya.)
This isn’t anything new—blocking funding for vets has become something of a habit among the GOP on Capitol Hill.
Of course, these votes don’t excuse misconduct or failures at the VA, which, if proven, should be dealt with harshly and promptly. And members of Congress from both parties are right to be concerned about what’s been unearthed about the VA recently. But falling victim to shallow, speculative coverage that haplessly fuels a partisan witch-hunt isn’t the answer. For, when mainstream news coverage routinely mischaracterizes the extent of misconduct or failure while ignoring the actual conditions that make misconduct and failure more likely, it becomes derelict in its duty to the public. This is the trap of “scandal journalism”—being obsessed with the theatrics leads to overlooking the facts. It’s all distraction and no solution. All of us, especially our veterans, deserve better.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/179937...e-old-mistakes
bitches! how's Another Great Boutons' Bitch Slapping workin out fer ya? :lol
lol boutons thinks this is a money problem. Typical liberal mentality.
:lol SN thinks Obama is personally responsible.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBoy
VA DOES have huge underfunding due to the huge increase in the number of veterans from REPUG extended, botched, underfunded, ill-equipped wars.
I like how your second post says "partisan witch-hunt is not the answer" and you have a thread about the insanity of the GOP and your first post was nothing but partisan.
Regardless, the issue I raised in the OP was that the administration didn't even know of these issues until they saw it on the news, ergo not being on top of their shit
yep, the Obama administration has done nothing about VA's problems often caused by REPUG funding cuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
yes, the WH receives DAILY reports of every fucking single thing that goes on in the Exec branch.
My bigger concern is that Obama's attack on whistleblowers will be extended to this VA waiting list whistleblower.
why did VA hospitals need to cheat on the waiting lists?
why are their waiting lists so long in the first place? lack of funds? lack of doctors?
the need for a waiting list =/= cheating the waiting list
you said that irrelevance, not IQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
why did SOME VA hospitals need to cheat on the waiting lists?
why are their waiting lists so long in the first place? lack of funds? lack of doctors?
same with months-long waiting to process vets' applications? why so long?
we KNOW why IRS enforcement of tax evaders is way down, Repug cut $100Ms off the IRS budget.
i brought up an article about cheated waiting lists and you spammed figures about budgets. i'll say it again. the needs for a wait list =/= cheating the wait list.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
throwing money at a problem is not always the solution, in any event. LAUSD, always asking for more money, had a 1 billion dollar program putting ipads into the hands of students. then they bitch about needing a billion dollars for :cry unfair wages. if agencies are using money carelessly, its irresponsible to give those agencies more money so they can do the same shit. its also how i felt about the bailouts
i wonder how much boutons makes from the astroturfing firm. nigga is on top of every spin job.
http://freebeacon.com/blog/the-real-...hcare-scandal/
"Because the VA scandal looks pretty bad—dozens may have died as a result of excess wait times—liberals don’t really have a choice but to be outraged, even as they insist that Obama, who has been in office for five years now, is in no way responsible.
But there’s another reason the VA scandal is incredibly inconvenient for liberals. It’s because, for years, they’ve been touting the VA as a model for socialized medicine. And now, they look pretty foolish for doing so."
Paul Krugman was on the case way back in 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/op...bad-ideas.html
Quote:
What Mr. Romney and everyone else should know is that the V.H.A. is a huge policy success story, which offers important lessons for future health reform...
Multiple surveys have found the V.H.A. providing better care than most Americans receive...
What’s behind this success? Crucially, the V.H.A. is an integrated system, which provides health care as well as paying for it. So it’s free from the perverse incentives created when doctors and hospitals profit from expensive tests and procedures, whether or not those procedures actually make medical sense. And because V.H.A. patients are in it for the long term, the agency has a stronger incentive to invest in prevention than private insurers, many of whose customers move on after a few years.
And yes, this is “socialized medicine” — although some private systems, like Kaiser Permanente, share many of the V.H.A.’s virtues. But it works — and suggests what it will take to solve the troubles of U.S. health care more broadly.
he's the LeBron's Zipper Nation of the political forumQuote:
Originally Posted by HI-FI
:rollinQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
But of course they would block this bill :lol
http://freebeacon.com/blog/senate-de...rs-department/
The House overwhelmingly passed the legislation on Wednesday, with a bipartisan vote of 390 to 33. (Only Democrats objected.)
House is awfully fast with firing people (War on Employees), but obstructive when giving them enough money to their jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
President Obama’s transition team was warned in 2008 that repeated audits showed the Veterans Affairs Department was misreporting wait times for medical treatment, including one audit revealing delays nearly 10 times worse than the department was officially acknowledging.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/21/obama-transition-team-told-about-3-audits-showing-/
all y'all rednecks still trying to stick Dems exclusively with VA problems?
It's REPUGS who enormously jacked up the load on VA with their bogus, bullshit, botched, prolonged wars, while repeatedly refusing to fund, and to defund the VA.
Somehow, when shit hits the fan under the Repugs, the defense is they are equivalent to the Dems
But when the shit hits the fan under the Dems, the Repugs are totally innocent.
How many of you ignorant rednecks think the House Repugs would have approved huge increases in VA funding equal to the huge increase in veteran care, if the Dems proposed such a bill these past 5 years?
boutons, I do believe that the government budget has been operating under a continuing resolution since the Dimm-o-craps wont let a budget come to the floor in the Senate. So as far as I know government has been operating under the only budget passed during Obama's administration.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
McCarthy: Last Time Senate Passed a Budget ‘The iPad Hadn’t Even Been Introduced’
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mcca...een-introduced
This little fiasco with the VA is just a preview of single payer that you "progressives" so desire.
:(
a federal budget didn't even exist until 1974, so did give that We The People/Tri-corner bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by xrayzebra
And there's a huge difference between what the federal budget actually says and what funds are actually allocated/spent.
The VA fiasco is not systemic nor recent, and is totally irrelevant to a federal health insurance/single-payer.
Well under either case, budget or how it was spent, it still belongs to the Dimm-o-craps. The came up with the budget and their administration spent the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Also Obama run on fixing the VA....remember?
the annual deficit has been DECREASING under Obama faster than anytime since WW2.Quote:
Originally Posted by xrayzebra
The Repugs, esp the House's Repug scrotum sucking extremists, wouldn't ever approve a Dem budget anyway, unless they amended it with sociopathic screw-the-poor, protect/enrich the corps/wealthy. I'm sure Obama and Dems know that.
Just look a clownish Ryan's last 4 budgets and his DEBT increasing budget projections for next 10 years.
So the Repugs and you rednecks assholes here whining about "no Obama budget" is just another fake outrage to distract from your total misgovernance and distracting, obstructing witch-hunting. iow, GFY
boutons with the name-calling bads :lol... rednecks, repugs, etc. he is still foolishly missing the point that the need for wait lists (as a result of funding, or lack thereof, etc) has nothing to do with cheating wait lists, which further endangers lives. you can stomp your feet about the lack of funding due to your administration refusing to pass a budget or refusing to adequately fund the VA hospitals, but it has nothing to do with the fact that wait lists are being cheated, which is an epidemic that will likely spread to other hospitals if they want to be government run one day
Didn't both Republicans and Democrats vote to go into both Iraq and Afghanistan? Just askin'.
I'm not excusing the cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
I'm saying the cheating arose due to lack of FINANCING to meet huge increase in vet health care from the Repugs' two bogus, botched wars.
America is saccharine, tearful, respectfucl with the adoration, glorification of all things murderous military, FREEDOM! MARANS! America Number One!, but when it comes to spending tax dollars, fuck the vets.
$Ts in corporate Welfare for the MIC and their investors? yawn.
Ah, yes, BOTh parties voted for AUMF and the Repug LIES about Iraq. :lol EQUIVALENCE, perfect EQUIVALENCE. Dems are just as bad as the Repugs. :lol
this thread was about the cheating of waitlists, which you are once again deflecting from
There They Go Again! yawn
GOP Hypocrites Call Vets Benefits Too Expensive But Want a $600 Billion Tax Cut for Business
Senate Republicans blocked a $21 billion plan to build new VA clinics because they said it was too expensive, but today House Republicans advanced a $600 billion tax cut for business.Back in February, Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would have expanded veterans’ benefits, and built 27 new VA clinics and facilities over the next ten years, because they thought the bill was too expensive. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) spoke for the group of 41 GOP obstructionists when he said, “This bill creates new veterans’ programs and it’s not paid for—it’s all borrowed money.”
The veterans benefits bill would have cost $21 billion over ten years.Today, the House Ways and Means Committee advanced a bill that would give businesses a $600 billion tax cut. Democrats have been opposed to the Republican plan to add nearly $300 billion to the deficit without paying for it.
According to The Hill, “As with the research tax break, Democrats said they generally supported the incentives considered by the committee. But none of them voted for any of the tax breaks, insisting they couldn’t get on board with clearing another slate of tax breaks that would add more than $300 billion to the deficit.
In all, the dozen preferences approved by the Ways and Means panel over the last four weeks cost $600 billion over a decade.”
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/05/29/gop-hypocrites-call-vets-benefits-expensive-600-billion-tax-cut-business.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=fee d&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Poli ticus+USA+%29
It's All Obama's Fault! Thanks, Obama!
Fire Shinsheki!
More off topic drivel.
off topic? underfunding, under resourced VA has been going on for decades, and esp in the last decade, Repugs ESPECIALLY, having greatly increased the VA burden with their bullshit wars, have defuned and/or refused to fund increases for VA.
off topic? :lol
SR has NOTHING to say.
How to Fix the VA
But with 9 million patients, 320,000 employees, 971 hospitals and clinics—It’s not going to be easy.
President Barack Obama had no choice but to accept Veteran Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki’s resignation. The VA inspector general’s interim report issued this week contained too many damning findings of “systemic” problems that grew under Shinseki’s watch. Key among these was the finding that the actual VA primary care wait times in Phoenix averaged 115 days—more than four times the VA’s previously reported average of 24 days. That discrepancy revealed a gap between reality and official reporting, and suggested questions about the VA’s integrity ran all the way up to the secretary’s office.
More broadly, the growing VA scandal cast doubt on the ability of the government to deliver health care, a major Obama administration priority. If the White House could not deliver on this promise to veterans, a key constituency for whom the president and vice president have frequently described health care as part of a “sacred trust,” then how could the administration be trusted to provide care for all Americans? Coming after the legal and practical challenges to the Affordable Care Act, the White House could not afford another health care failure. And so Shinseki had to go.
Unfortunately, his departure will do little to fix the broader problems in the massive VA health care system—and may even set the quasi-leaderless agency back as it waits for a new secretary to be appointed and confirmed.
Winning armies rarely learn. It takes the strategic shock of defeat to catalyze learning and change.
The VA is the second-largest cabinet agency, and the nation’s largest health care and benefits provider, with an overall fiscal 2015 budget of $165 billion (greater than the State Department, USAID, and entire intelligence community combined), including $60 billion for health care. The VA employs more than 320,000 personnel to run 151 major medical centers, 820 outpatient clinics, 300 storefront “Vet Centers,” more than 50 regional benefits offices, and scores of other facilities.
This massive system provides health care to roughly 9 million enrolled veterans, including 6 million who seek care on a regular basis.
It’s hard to overstate the challenges of leading this massive agency: The ideal candidate would probably fuse the best traits of a general like Shinseki, a politician like Bill Clinton, and a businessman like Lee Iacocca or Mitt Romney. The systemic integrity problems in the VA’s health care system, coupled with the broader resource allocation problems they were masking, will remain for the next secretary, whoever he or she is.
Here are six ways to begin to fix the VA.
1. Give the VA the resources it needs. Even with its massive $60 billion health care budget, the VA arguably lacks the funding it needs to treat all veterans . This resource shortfall is the root cause of the scheduling shenanigans in Phoenix: If the VA had what it needed, it wouldn’t have needed to play fast and loose with veterans’ appointments. A group of veterans organizations prepares its own shadow VA budget each year; this year’s budget called for approximately $7.8 billion more in VA health funding. This money would go to hiring doctors and nurses (assuming they’re available—a national doctor shortage affects the VA too), as well as building or leasing new facilities.
2. Allocate VA resources more smartly. The veteran population is undergoing tremendous demographic and geographic change. As World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and Cold War conscripts die, the veteran population is changing to reflect the all-volunteer force we have today: smaller, more dispersed, more diverse, and increasingly concentrated in urban or coastal areas. Unfortunately, this is not where VA hospitals and clinics are located.
The VA is seeing demand from both older veterans and younger veterans. The median age of the veteran population is 64, meaning that the majority of veterans are hitting retirement age and presenting themselves to the VA with service-connected conditions compounded by age. At the same time, veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan cohort are seeking VA care and benefits in record numbers. The next secretary needs congressional support to shrink or close underutilized VA facilities, build or lease new clinics (favoring outpatient clinics instead of large hospitals, following the overall direction of American health care), and move VA personnel between facilities to reflect where veterans live now, and where they need care.
3. Restructure the VA health care system. The VA divides its health system of 151 hospitals and 820 clinics into 23 regions that don’t align with any other geographic scheme within the federal government. These regions lack the leadership, staff capacity, and authority they need to oversee health care facilities. As a result, hospitals have evolved into fiefdoms unto themselves, giving rise to the expression, “If you’ve been to one VA hospital, you’ve been to one VA hospital.” This system must be broken apart and rebuilt to give the secretary the ability to implement national policy, standardize practices, and ensure quality patient care. Ideally, the VA would cut the number of regions and align them in some way with the regions used by the Department of Health and Human Services or Department of Defense TRICARE system. Within these VA health care regions, senior executives should be selected for management expertise and ability, not just for time served as a VA clinician. And regional executives should be picked by the secretary and be accountable to him or her—potentially with a requirement for Senate confirmation—not unlike the system for selection of generals and admirals, who require Senate confirmation at the very top levels.
4. Rebuild the VA’s healthcare IT system. Twenty years ago, the VA led the nation in development of electronic health records. Today, the VA has fallen behind. The VA’s antiquated systems contributed to the chaos in Phoenix where, reportedly, front-line employees used DOS-based systems to manage appointments and clinical resources. This problem is exacerbated by the VA’s balkanized system of regions, hospitals, and clinics. Many facilities have customized their software in ways that don’t mesh with other VA facilities. The next VA secretary must completely overhaul this system, much as Shinseki did for the VA’s benefits system (at great cost). The VA should consider replacing its antiquated appointments system with one that is more transparent, allowing veterans to see wait times and relative availability across the system, and make health care decisions accordingly. Such solutions exist in the private sector. The VA should embrace them. Likewise, the VA must invest in its health records system, and ideally build one that meshes with the system now being procured by the Pentagon.
5. Integrate better with the private and nonprofit sector. The VA provides exceptional medical care, particularly for service-connected issues such as prosthetics, hearing loss, and combat stress. However, more than two-thirds of veterans seek medical care from non-VA sources rather than the VA, and that’s unlikely to change. Many more veterans get care from nonprofit providers, especially for mental health issues. The VA must find ways to integrate its care with that given by the private and nonprofit sector, to provide veterans with “continuity of care” wherever they get seen. More pointedly, the VA must better leverage external resources to fill gaps and shortfalls in its care, such as in primary care and mental health care. The demographic changes within the veterans community suggest the VA is seeing its peak demand now, from young and old veterans alike. Building permanent VA infrastructure may not make as much sense as leveraging private providers, contractors, and nonprofit organizations to serve veterans (ideally knitted together by a common health records system).
6. Build a bridge across the Potomac. One of Shinseki’s greatest failures belongs also to two other revered cabinet officers, former Defense Secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta. Defense and the VA failed to create an integrated health records system (or separate systems that would talk to each other), and have failed more broadly to synchronize and align the two agencies’ care for veterans, service members, and military families. The redundancies between these two agencies cost the taxpayers billions of dollars each year, and worse, create gaps for veterans to fall into, such as when claims submitted to the VA can’t be substantiated for lack of Pentagon service records. Even Shinseki, with his long Army lineage and prior service as the top Army general, failed to partner effectively with the Pentagon. The next secretary must do better, especially in a post-war era of fiscal austerity, when both agencies are likely to have fewer dollars to serve their respective populations.
There’s a lesson from military history that applies well here: Winning armies rarely learn. It takes the strategic shock of defeat to catalyze learning and change within armies. Although the VA doesn’t fight wars like its brother agency the Defense Department, it retains a military culture because of its leadership and the large number of veterans who work there. And like the Pentagon, the VA only learns or changes well under enormous external pressure, such as the kind that comes upon losing a war, or occurs during a political scandal like this one.
Notwithstanding this week’s headlines, the data overwhelmingly show the VA has done well in supporting veterans over the last decade or two. Patient satisfaction scores are high; the claims backlog is down; the VA has worked with the nonprofit community to reduce veteran homelessness by roughly 24 percent in five years. The list goes on. Nonetheless, deep problems remain within the VA that threaten its ability to succeed in the years to come. Today’s political crisis may offer the strategic shock the VA needs to address these core issues, now under a new secretary, to serve our veterans as well as they have served us.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...va.single.html
GME Funding: How to Fix the Doctor Shortage
gehttps://www.aamc.org/linkableblob/27...c2012-data.jpg
The Issue
The number of federally funded residency training positions was capped by Congress in 1997 by the Balanced Budget Act. The 26,000 residency positions available for first year trainees will not be enough to provide training for the students graduating from medical school as early as 2016. In addition, Medicare support of graduate medical education (GME) includes paying its share of the costs of training, as well as supporting the higher costs of critical care services, such as emergency rooms and burn units, on which communities rely. Without adequate support, the ability of teaching hospitals to provide essential patient care is threatened.
The Solution
Medical schools are doing their part by expanding enrollment over the last several years. Students have responded with applications and enrollment reaching new highs. Now Congress must do its part by lifting the cap on the number of federally supported residency training positions. Lawmakers have responded with proposals in the House and Senate to increase the number of residency positions. But they must act now in order to ensure that there are enough physicians for our growing and aging population.
https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/campai...ixdocshortage/
Balanced Federal Budgets, purce VRWC/1% austerity bullshit.
as i've said, this thread has nothing to do with budgeting, yet thats all you keep spamming. feel free to start a new one regarding VA budgets
SR :lol VA cheating has NOTHING to do with VA resource and VA mgmg pressure to meet/beat the numbers :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
im sorry if the :cry pressure :cry was so much that they put lives in risk by cheating wait lists
boutons continual spamming and linkdumping is slowly killing this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
you dickless rednecks, bubbas, tea baggers, Repugs, BigCarbon shills, libertarians, just HATE being bitch slapped by progressive, liiberal, well informed, intelligent Great Boutons.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
In your dreams, simpleton. :lol boutons
i could just spam articles that nobody here will read to make it seem like my opinions are popular tooQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
your opinions suckQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
my fact-filled articles that you don't read, to your deepening ignorance, are briliiant.
(SOCIALIST ALERT!)
Bernie Sanders Shows Leadership on VA As GOP Looks For Ways to Abandon Vets
Bernie Sanders reacted to Eric Shinseki’s resignation while speaking to veterans in Burlington Vermont on Friday with sadness and later in a statement posted on his website.
Secretary Shinseki is an American hero who courageously served his country in war, rose to be the Army chief of staff and has dedicated his distinguished career to helping his fellow soldiers and veterans. I am sad that he resigned.[/COLOR]
The unequivocal goal of the VA must be to provide the highest-quality health care possible to all of our veterans in a timely manner. The new leadership must transform the culture of the VA, establish accountability and punish those responsible for the reprehensible manipulation of wait times. As chairman of the Senate veterans’ committee I look forward to working with President Obama, the new VA leadership and my Senate colleagues to make that happen.[/COLOR]
In direct contrast to the Republican Party, Bernie Sanders recognized that the VA’s problems cannot be solved by playing the blame game. In February, he proposed a bill to address chronic under resourcing at the VA – a bill that Republicansblocked. Sanders recognizes that the VA does have management and administrative problems but it also needs more facilities and more healthcare providers to address the inevitability of increased demand as a country in perpetual war.Now that Republicans and the beltway punditry have their pound of flesh, Veterans deserve real solutions to the problems that have plagued the Veterans Administration for decades. Problems which have nothing to do with Eric Shinseki.
If we are going to play the blame game, then look no further than Republicans who have consistently under resourced the VA then blamed the VA for its inability to meet ever increasing demand.It’s the same game Republicans play for any and all programs they don’t like. Under resource them, blame Democrats, then pitch throwing people, in this case our vets, to unaccountable corporate wolves. It’s the same game they play when it comes to Social Security, Medicare, Medic-Aid, education and prisons.
As usual, the Republican “solution” would benefit their corporate friends and this time Veterans would pay the price.Just consider that the VA provides facilities in rural areas that the private sector ignores because, frankly, those locations aren’t profitable enough. Moreover, the VA’s facilities have specialists to provide the sort of care that veterans need, but is not available at private facilities.
As Suzanne Gordon explains:
Many injured soldiers have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan with what is known as poly-trauma — PTSD plus traumatic brain injury and limb amputations. Few primary care physicians — or even specialists — have much experience treating such cases in the private sector. In fact, without the VA, vets would have trouble getting any primary care services given the serious shortage of primary care providers in this country.[/COLOR]
Perhaps Eric Shinseki did the right thing by resigning, but giving Republicans his head and probably those of other high level officials at the VA won’t solve a thing.As a temporary measure, we should extend care beyond the VA, because our Vets need care now. They have already waited an unacceptable period of time to see a doctor, let alone get the treatment they need.It will be up to Democrats to lead by reintroducing the Vets benefits bill that Republicans blocked in February. Without question, Republicans will block it again while claiming that throwing the Vets to corporate wolves is the solution.It will also be up to us to stand by our Vets, not only by voting out the laziest lawmakers in our history, but by making their lives miserable while they continue to accept their pay checks and spend the bulk of their time meeting with corporate donors and the rest of it claiming to care about vets but doing nothing.
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/05/...iticus+USA+%29
Privatizing VA would, like privtaizing SS, Medicare, Medicaid, would be distributiting tax payer wealth to corps and their investors.
your articles are just a whole bunch of tl;dr's that don't even address my opQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
I fucked your your "blame Shinsheki" brain-dead thread with lots of facts and historical context, and put precise blame on the Repugs, so GFY.
Do you think intimidating Shinsheki into quitting, as supposedly omnipotent King of VA SOLELY responsible for VA's underfunding, accomplished anything?
Your linkdumps suck.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
The war on terror started on September 11, 2001. Congressional leadership has had almost 13 years to build up the VA with enough staff and facilities to care for the wounded from two wars. After news broke that the VA was failing our veterans, the Senate finally began to act.
A bill was brought to the Senate floor that would allow the VA to contract with private medical facilities, enabling veterans facing long waits to get quicker treatment. The VA would also be able to use $500 million from its current budget to hire more medical staff. While I do not agree with allowing veterans to go to private medical facilities, this bill was a good start. The organization clearly needs more doctors, more nurses, more staff, more facilities. Only three senators voted against this bill. Of those three, one of them is my senator, Ron Johnson (R-WI).
Sen. Johnson said that he couldn’t support the bill because of its cost—$35 billion the first two years and $50 billion per year after that, according to a preliminary estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
This is the same Sen. Johnson who said in a recent MSNBC interview that the current crisis in Iraq was caused because President Obama was not forceful enough about keeping troops in the country when the war ended. I am sure he would have found the money for that. I wonder if Senator Johnson would whine about the costs of the VA if just one of his three children had spent a year or more in some godforsaken hellhole like Afghanistan or Iraq.
Sen. Johnson married into money and has never worked a day in his life. The only constituents he cares about are the ones who agree with him. He does not and can not understand what our veterans are going through. Veterans need the specialized care the VA provides. The average family practitioner is just not able to deal with a double amputee with PTSD because it's just not something he or she was trained to do. Of course Sen. Johnson just wants to privatize veteran's care and make it a for-profit industry. To him, it isn't about caring for veterans—it's about making a buck for his wealthy donors.
Sen. Johnson is an embarrassment to Wisconsin and to our nation. Veterans deserve the best possible care we can give them. They earned it. It should never come down to cost; these young men and women gave up their youth, gave up their innocence, to serve our country. In many cases, they have given far more than we can ever repay. If our nation could find $4 to $6 trillion dollars to pay for two wars, we sure as hell better come up with the money to care for those wounded in those wars. They earned it, and we owe them.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/0...A?detail=email
Just one of many Repug assholes who screw the vets, but will support spending $Ts for Other People's Kids to risk maiming of mind and body, and death.
Rachel Maddow shreds House GOP’s ‘shameless lip service’ on bill helping veterans
“Right now, while this crisis is still happening, all of Washington’s flagrant and shameless lip service on veterans’ issues is not being matched at all with action,” she said.
Last month, she explained, Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) put together a bill calling for the construction of 26 new Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinics in 18 states, as well as the hiring of additional VA medical personnel.
The bill also allowed veterans currently living more than 40 miles away from a VA facility to see a private medical professional. At the time, Sanders referred to it as a step toward mitigating some of the damage uncovered by multiple reports of VA malfeasance regarding handling of patients’ wait times. The bill passed in the Senate in a 93-3 vote.
“Didn’t you think that this was done?” Maddow asked. “Didn’t you think that this was done after that whole crisis and [Gen. Eric] Shinseki resigning? I mean, that’s Bernie Sanders and John McCain, of all people. If they could get together on this, and the Senate agreed 93 to 3 to go with them on this, didn’t you think that this was done? This is not done.”
the bill has not been able to move out of a congressional committee, where House Republicans have complained about the cost of McCain and Sanders’ legislation.
“See, when the attention is there and everybody’s complaining about how something must be done, it’s very easy to demand, in theory, that ‘this must be done, no expense spared, this is a sacred obligation that we’re violating, we have to fix it,’” she argued. “Sounds great. Print it, put it on a campaign ad, right? But when it comes to actually doing it, when it comes to actually putting your money where your mouth is, apparently so far the answer is,
‘No, we don’t actually want to spend the money.’”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/0...e+Raw+Story%29
Republicans don't want to solve the VA healthcare disaster
While Republicans and their billionaire allies are very happy to politicize the crisis in the Veterans Administration medical system, they're not too anxious to do anything to fix it.
A House-Senate conference committee tasked with writing a compromise veterans’ health bill continues to struggle with a Congressional Budget Office cost estimate for what it will take to allow veterans to seek care from private health care providers and avoid notorious treatment delays at veterans’ medical centers.
[The] CBO has reduced its estimate by 15 percent to $38 billion per year, down from $50 billion, but Republicans are still keen on spending offsets while Democrats are urging a non-offset emergency designation for the bill.
Of course they don't want to solve this problem.
Beating up on President Obama is much more important to them than taking care of veterans.
Republicans only want to help veterans if they can take the money away from some other program and make someone else hurt.
Chances are, the programs they would cut to fund the VA fixes would be other programs that veterans rely on, like foodstamps or housing assistance.
Because for Republicans, a veteran's service only counts if she doesn't need any help when she gets home.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/0...?detail=email#
Wait Lists Grow as Many More Veterans Seek Care and Funding Falls Far Short
One year after outrage about long waiting lists for health care shook theDepartment of Veterans Affairs, the agency is facing a new crisis: The number of veterans on waiting lists of one month or more is now 50 percent higher than it was during the height of last year’s problems, department officials say. The department is also facing a nearly $3 billion budget shortfall, which could affect care for many veterans.
The agency is considering furloughs, hiring freezes and other significant moves to reduce the gap. A proposal to address a shortage of funds for one drug — a new, more effective but more costly hepatitis C treatment — by possibly rationing new treatments among veterans and excluding certain patients who have advanced terminal diseases or suffer from a “persistent vegetative state or advanced dementia” is stirring bitter debate inside the department.
Agency officials expect to petition Congress this week to allow them to shift money into programs running short of cash. But that may place them at odds with Republican lawmakers who object to removing funds from a new program intended to allow certain veterans on waiting lists and in rural areas to choose taxpayer-paid care from private doctors outside the department’s health system.
“Something has to give,” the department’s deputy secretary, Sloan D. Gibson, said in an interview. “We can’t leave this as the status quo. We are not meeting the needs of veterans, and veterans are signaling that to us by coming in for additional care, and we can’t deliver it as timely as we want to.”
Since the waiting-list scandal broke last year, the department has broadly expanded access to care. Its doctors and nurses have handled 2.7 million more appointments than in any previous year, while authorizing 900,000 additional patients to see outside physicians. In all, agency officials say, they have increased capacity by more than seven million patient visits per year — double what they originally thought they needed to fix shortcomings.
The crisis may come to a head when Mr. Gibson testifies on Thursday on Capitol Hill, where Republicans have already criticized what they see as foot-dragging by the department on starting the Choice Card program. One congressional official briefed on the budget problems also said the agency had been slow to recognize how much demand and costs would soar for hepatitis C treatments. The budding crisis may reopen a partisan debate about veterans’ health care that has paralleled a larger philosophical debate about the size of government.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/us...s&emc=rss&_r=0
Repugs put their "kill govt" ideology ahead of medical care for vets. Fuck up, under fund the VA, make vets suffer, Repug ideology dictates.
Report: VA Outperforms Private Sector on Key Measures
AA little-noticed recent report by three leading research groups found that on critical measures, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) consistently performs as well as and often better than private sector health-care providers. The VHA does this with patients who are sicker, older, and poorer than many of their counterparts seen in the private sector.
Among the key findings of the report, conducted by the consulting firm Grant, Thornton & McKinsey Company and by two nonprofit research companies—the RAND Corp and the MITRE Corporation—were that:
• Postoperative morbidity was lower for VA patients compared with non-veterans receiving non-VA care.
• Inpatient care was more or as effective in VA as in non-VA hospitals.
• VA hospitals were more likely to follow best practices in the use of central venous catheter line infection prevention and rates of mortality declined more quickly in VA over time than in non-VA settings for specific conditions.
The report also found that veterans in nursing homes were less likely to develop pressure ulcers;
that outpatients and those suffering chronic conditions got better follow-up care, and that
VA health providers offered better mental health and obesity counseling and blood pressure control, particularly for African Americans. Importantly, income and educational disparities were smaller at VHA facilities in such areas as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer screenings.
The report confirmed what many fighting for what is known as “right care”—defined as avoiding toxic, unnecessary tests, medications, and procedures—have long understood: that the VHA, contrary to its status as a GOP and media whipping boy, has been a pioneer in providing clinically appropriate care to veterans.
Elderly patients in the VHA were less likely to receive the kinds of medications that can make them sicker and sometimes even kill them, the report found.
VHA patients were more likely to be spared toxic chemotherapy within 14 days of death or be admitted to an ICU 30 days before death.
This was attributed to the VHA’s commitment to palliative and hospice care.
Health care quality expert Charlene Harrington, a professor emeritus the University of California at San Francisco, called the report “really impressive, particularly given the patient mix and chronic underfunding.”
https://calendar.google.com/calendar...c&pli=1#main_7
The right’s campaign to privatize VA care reaches a new level
some of the 2016 Republican presidential hopefuls have included at least partial VA privatization plans in their platforms– Ben Carson went so far as to say, “We don’t need a Department of Veterans Affairs” – despite the VA’s record of excellence, and the fact that the VA system as a whole“outperforms the rest of the health care system by just about every metric. Surveys also show that veterans give VA hospitals and clinics a higher customer satisfaction than patients give private-sector hospitals.”
It’s important to remember, though, that GOP proposals are part of a broader ideological campaign. In their latest issue, my friends at the Washington Monthly published a fascinating investigative report on the effort to privatize the VA launched by Concerned Veterans for America (CVA), a conservative outfit that’s received support from the Kochs’ operation.
Over the last year, every major GOP candidate with the exception of Donald Trump has made a pilgrimage to gatherings put on by Concerned Veterans for America (CVA), a group that had barely formed during the 2012 primary cycle. Whereas candidates back in the day were under pressure from the old-line veterans’ groups to promise undying support for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and its nationwide network of hospitals and clinics, the opposite has been true this season. Candidates at CVA rallies have been competing with each other to badmouth the VA and its allegedly shabby treatment of veterans. And all have pledged fealty to the CVA’s goal of moving as many vets as possible out of the VA into private care. Even Trump is calling for more “choice.”
And while that’s certainly of interest when it comes to the 2016 campaign and the scope of the Republican agenda looking ahead, there’s an even more timely aspect to this that matters right now.
Paul Glastris, the Monthly’s editor in chief, had a piece in the Boston Globe yesterday about the debate over veterans’ care unfolding literally as I type.
This enormously important question will be discussed, and perhaps decided, at meetings on Monday and Tuesday of the Commission on Care. That’s a federally chartered group that is writing binding recommendations on the future of the VA.
If you’ve never heard of the Commission on Care, you’re not alone. Virtually none of the mainstream news outlets have covered its public hearings, which have been going on since the fall. […] It just so happens that four of the 15 members of the commission are executives with major medical centers that stand to gain from the outsourcing of veterans’ care. Another works for CVA, the Koch brothers-backed group, and yet another for an organization allied with CVA.
Last month these six commissioners plus a seventh were outed for writing a secret draft of the commission’s recommendations – in which they call for full privatization of the VA by 2035 – in possible violation of the Sunshine and Federal Advisory Committee Acts.
This revelation infuriated the other commission members. It also led prominent veterans’ groups, including the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, to send a letter to the commission chair slamming the secret draft and expressing their united opposition to privatizing the VA.
The Commission on Care was created by Congress in 2014. Both the White House and Congress choose its members, and I’ll let you guess which commissioners were chosen by which branch.
The members are wrapping up a two-day session today, with anti-privatization forces turning out to register their concerns. The commission’s final recommendations are expected to be released in June.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
"GOP proposals are part of a broader ideological campaign."
iow, GOP's ideology is to rape taxpayers by transferring their taxes to for-profit corporations. aka, redistribution upward
John McCain slams key veterans’ advocacy groups
The Republican senator appeared on his daughter’s radio show late last week – just a few days before Memorial Day – and Meghan McCain asked about the need for improvements in the VA system. The GOP lawmaker, facing a tough re-election fight this year, didn’t hold back.
JOHN MCCAIN: I blame some of the old veterans’ service organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Disabled American Veterans and American Legion. They are against the Choice Card. Why would they be against the Choice Card
MEGHAN MCCAIN: Why are they against it?
JOHN MCCAIN: They have been co-opted by that system. They have this symbiotic relationship with the VA bureaucracy. For them to say they are against a veteran having a choice to me is unconscionable.
After expressing his deep “disappointment” with some of the nation’s largest advocacy groups working on behalf of veterans, the Republican senator added that veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan “are best represented by the Concern Veterans of America.”
The CVA, for those unfamiliar with the group, is a far-right organization funded in part by the Koch brothers’ operation, and has been an enthusiastic proponent of privatizing veterans’ care.
So what’s behind John McCain’s broadside?
Military.com reported last week on the senator’s efforts to expand the so-called Veterans Choice Program, which the nation’s largest veterans’ service organizations are skeptical of for an obvious reason: the goal is to “steer vets to private health care providers.”
While advocates see expanding the program as a way to provide veterans with more options, the groups – including The American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Disabled American Veterans and Paralyzed Veterans of America – say it would lead to a fraying and shrinking of an integrated managed care system they say serves veterans best.
“The American Legion appreciates Senator McCain’s efforts to improve the provision of health care for America’s veterans. However, one of the central, core elements of the bill expands care in the community in a way that is concerning,” Lou Celli, veterans affairs and rehabilitation division director for the Legion, said Tuesday during a hearing of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.
Celli said the Legion supported the Choice Program when it was proposed and passed but not as a broad replacement for VA health care. “Veterans should be provided with the option of receiving care in the community as a supplement to VA health care and not to supplant VA care,” he said.
This, evidently, has sparked the senator’s indignation.
Obviously, given McCain’s decorated and heroic service, he can go after groups like the VFW, the DAV, and American Legion in ways most politicians cannot – but that doesn’t mean the senator is correct and the veterans’ service organizations are wrong. McCain appears to be pursuing an ideological agenda and it’s hardly surprising that these veterans’ groups are reluctant to get on board.
As for the underlying policy matter, the Washington Monthly reported earlier this year on the results of the “Choice Card” system championed by McCain and other congressional Republicans.
The basic idea of the VA partnering more with private providers was not flawed in principle. Indeed, the agency already had programs through which it contracted private doctors to perform certain kinds of specialty care or care in remote regions where it lacked facilities. The VA also had an extensive history of collaborating with academic medical centers. Done right, closer collaboration between VA and non-VA providers could improve care for everyone in many areas.
But the new legislation set in motion a “choice” program in which the government would be paying for bills submitted by private providers for care that was unmanaged, uncoordinated, and, to the extent that it replicated the performance of the private health care system, often unneeded. This is the very opposite of the integration and adherence to evidence-based protocols that has long made VA care a model of safety and effectiveness.
Worse, implementation of the Choice Card was a disaster from every point of view. Congress gave the VA only 90 days to stand up the program.
Largely because of that insane time line, the VA was able to attract bids from only two companies.
Each of these has a sole contract that gives it a monopoly wherever it operates,
and each put together networks that were so narrow and poorly administered that that for many months vets who received Choice Cards typically could not find a single doctor who would accept them.
Over the course of 2015, many of these problems of implementation were at least partially sorted out, but the basic flaw in the model remains.
This is precisely what John McCain is so desperate to expand – even if that means condemning some of the country’s largest veterans’ service organizations in the process.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
summary: privatize govt (ie, taxpayers weatlh), with tons of proof that privatization either more expensive or less productive, and many times BOTH.
iow, privatization is a VRWC/Repug strategy to loot taxpayers.
same story with privatizing Social Security and Medicare. Repugs FUCK UP everything they touch while enriching BigCorp.
Campaign to privatize VA care moving in the wrong direction
After controversy erupted a couple of years ago surrounding the Veterans Administration, Congress created something called the Commission on Care, whose members would write recommendations that would help shape the future of the VA. For conservatives, this created an opportunity to pursue a long-sought goal: privatization of veterans’ care.
In April, the Washington Monthly’s Paul Glastris wrote a piece for the Boston Globe, noting that several conservative Commission members quietly put together a recommendation calling for full privatization of the VA by 2035, prompting renewed lobbying from prominent veterans’ groups, including the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, strongly opposing the far-right push.
Last week, the veterans’ advocates prevailed. Glastris published a report on the end of the fight, at least for now.
On Wednesday, the Commission released its final report. To the surprise of most observers, the commission rejected privatization as the solution. While detailing a host of serious failings with the VA, the report notes that
“care delivered by VA is in many ways comparable or better in clinical quality to that generally available in the private sector.” :lol
It concludes that thenew Choice Program was “flawed” in both its design and execution, adding that “the program has aggravated wait times and frustrated veterans, private-sector health care providers participating in networks, and V.H.A. alike.” :lol
Rather than wholesale outsourcing, the report recommends addressing issues of access by “standing up integrated veteran-centric, community-based delivery networks,” a plan roughly similar to the one Hillary Clinton had called for.
The editorial board of the New York Times added, “The V.A. is troubled, no question. But the commission properly stops short of recommending a solution dear to ideologues on the right, which is to dismantle one of the largest bureaucracies in American government – one with a critically important mission – and hand the wreckage to the private sector.”
The editorial’s reference to “ideologues on the right” was not a throwaway line. Congressional Republicans appointed several members to the Commission on Care with very conservative backgrounds, including one who works for Concerned Veterans for America (CVA), a conservative outfit that’s received support from the Koch brothers’ operation.
The right saw this as an important opportunity, but in this case, conservatives failed. Glastris called it a“stunning defeat of conservative anti-government ideology and … an important victory for evidence-based good government.”
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
Religion and ideology makes you one stupid, ignorant, destructive, retrograde mofo.
Any government run health care system will have problems. The VA system is a good reason not to want single payer.
The US health care system is a FANTASTIC reason to have Medicare for all, just like other industrial countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Only time it bothers me is when he hijacks other people's threads and it's not topical with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
Given all the Breitbart stupidity that gets posted here I cannot really get too mad at his hyperpartisan sources from the other side.
Poor little dickless TB :lol , just hates when my linkdumps bitch slap him and his Repug heros silly with their own words and actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
His megalomania is kinda funny like a Jerry Lewis movie. You really cannot take him seriously. He's a caricature.
A seriously disturbed caricature.
Cept you can't.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
lol repug heroes.
It's actually a good reason to have single payor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
What did I miss?
single payor isn't the solution. Medicare for all is. Taken out of everybody's incomes, including unearned income.
Ummm.... That's single payor.
ok, I saw an article that defined single payer as not exactly the same as medicare for all, but there is a probably more definition of single payer that is Medicare for all.
I pretty much base my description from this...
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what-is-single-payer
VA disability backlog tops 70,000 — 7 months after it was supposed to be zero
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/v...airs/86862716/
Cure To Some VA Waits Creates New Ills
We who oppose calls to privatize the work of the Veterans Affairs Department are sorely tested at times.
Complaints two years ago of unreasonably long waits for care at VA health facilities led to “reforms” in several VA programs.
In 2013, applications for VA disability benefits were piling up, with some claims languishing for over a year. The remedy — streamlining the process for judging disability claims — was not done carefully.
The new computerized system demanded less evidence to prove disability.
Examiners were given less time to spend with the applicants, forcing them to make rushed evaluations.
It was inevitable that some veterans would exploit these weaknesses to obtain unwarranted disability payments or pad their checks.
As a result, the plan to unclog the pipeline for disability claims has ended up re-clogging it with fraudulent ones.
Veterans with great needs are bumped out of appointments by fakers. And money that could go to those too disabled to work a regular job gets diverted to the well-bodied.
Veterans themselves are complaining about the scams.
http://www.nationalmemo.com/cure-va-...ates-new-ills/
:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
What would Trash/Repugs have done? fuck 'em, "americ'a broke" $2.2B instead goes to capitalists tax cuts
Veterans Exposed To Contaminated Water At Marine Base To Receive Disability Benefits
Veterans, former reservists and former National Guard members who served Camp Lejeune in North Carolina and have been diagnosed with one of eight diseases are eligible.
The Obama administration has agreed to provide disability benefits to military veterans exposed to contaminated drinking water while at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, according to an official notice published on Thursday.
Veterans, former reservists and former National Guard members who served for at least 30 days at the U.S. Marine Corps Base from 1953 to 1987 and have been diagnosed with one of eight diseases are eligible, according to the document published in the Federal Register, the government’s official journal.
The Associated Press, which first reported the story, said the estimated cost to taxpayers of the added benefits would total $2.2 billion over five years.
The department has estimated that up to 900,000 service members were potentially exposed to the tainted water at the base, the AP reported.
Contaminants included the volatile organic compounds trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, benzene and vinyl chloride.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/..._term=Reuters&
Obviously, just being in the military is very dangerous, without ever seeing combat. WTF wrong with the military life?
I lost a friend killed by jet engine cleaning fluid when he was in the Marines. Several in his platoon died from the same bizarre lung disease.
Who was POTUS at the time(s) of their deaths?Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
tee, hee.
GFY I don't want Medicare for all, I want single payor.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux