Wisconsin Whistle-blowing Veteran Vindicated as Neocons Target Shinseki

To listen to Republicans today, the decades-long culture of the VA of Delay, Deny and Hope You Die sprung into being in January 2009.

During the Bush-Cheney administration Vietnam-era veteran, an early whistle blower of VA abuse and neglect, Keith Roberts of Wisconsin, navigated through the maze-like process of filing his claim for disability benefits for his diagnosed PTSD.

Roberts accused the VA officials at the Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center of fraud, fabricating the minutes of a benefits hearing and altering his C-file (claim file).

Roberts said the VA were a "bunch of crooks." In retaliation top VA officials and a corrupt U.S. attorney indicted and criminally convicted Roberts in 2004-05 to shut him up. The indictment was based solely on the testimony of VA special agent with the VA regional Inspector General office in Hines, Illinois.

When President Obama announced on December 7, 2008 that he would appoint Eric Shinseki to become veterans affairs secretary, Roberts and a small band of veterans' advocates said Shinseki needed to clean house at the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) (VA).

Rid the VA of bureaucrats from the some 1,700 medical centers, the deputy assistant secretaries at the Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA) like Michael McLendon who during the Bush administration blamed PTSD on lack of belief in God and country. (McKelvey, Boston Review) and search out and can the people who don't want veterans to receive benefits.

What eludes most mainstream news is that embedded neocons throughout the VA have sabotaging the VA for decades because they are ideologically opposed to the mission of caring for veterans in the first place, and want to privatize the whole agency.

While former VA staff attorney and Vietnam veteran Robert Walsh (who now works for veterans in private practice), former VBA staffer Paul Sullivan, and Anthony Hardie (Gulf War veteran and advocate) and veterans’ advocate Steve Robinson (a veteran who served in Ranger and Special Operations units) kept spreading the word about the neocons and anti-veterans' cabals at the VA, they found in Secretary Shinseki who a man who didn't listen.

Said Robinson in 2010: "(Y)es, there have been some improvements, ... but it baffles the mind to think that the Administration believes change will occur if they don’t clean house, and remove the entrenched bureaucrats, and policy wonks, who are gatekeepers to affecting that change. I don’t know why they haven’t moved them out, but they are still there, and they are, in fact, sabotaging Shinseki on several fronts."

Shinseki, as noted on the Rachel Maddow Show last night, was a whistleblower himself as a military general on the Bush-Cheney 2003 invasion of Iraq, and now Republicans want him as a fall guy and political punching bag for "(c)hronic VA problems." 

I don't feel too bad for Shinseki. 

As a whistleblower, he didn't bare anything like the injustices of Wisconsin veteran Keith Roberts at the hands of the VA and U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic.

Shinseki never listened to the likes of Keith Roberts, Bob Walsh, Paul Sullivan, Anthony Hardie and Steve Robinson.

Wrongfully Convicted: Keith Roberts Redux

PTSD fraud at the VA is like voter fraud on a national level, there is no 'there' there

Had an interesting exchange with Attorney Robert P. Walsh, a Vietnam War Army combat veteran, who devotes his life to helping military veterans in his law practice.

Walsh was the attorney of Wisconsin's Keith Roberts, a Navy Vietnam-era veteran, unjustly convicted of wire fraud in 2006. [The conviction was upheld on appeal to the federal Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in a July 2008 decision reading in part: "The record might also have supported a jury determination that Mr. Roberts sincerely believed that his statements were true and that he had no intention to defraud the Government," by Justice Kenneth Ripple. But Ripple notes of the guilty verdict, that, "It is beyond our authority to disturb such a finding on appeal."]

Roberts' real crime, in the eyes of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, was hounding the VA (DVA) and taking seriously his right to pursue a disability benefits claim—a dangerous practice for veterans during the Bush-Cheney administration.

And to listen to Walsh, this is a danger that has been carried on in the Obama administration.

Personally, I thought the embedded neocons at the VA and Veterans Benefit Administration and the corrupt US attorneys were mostly gone.

Walsh doesn't give a damn about anything except helping veterans, so he is someone worth listening to, if one takes helping veterans seriously.

Some edited notes from Bob Walsh on veterans and VA:

The VA has used and continues to use the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) as their enforcer, a private police force.

Wisconsin's Keith Roberts is only one example.

The probable cause that a crime had been committed in the Roberts case: "there were inconsistencies in the VA benefits claims file."

Since the benefits disability system is ex parte and non-adversarial and dozens of employees have access to the file, that should not warrant a criminal indictment in Federal District Court, as it did.

Had the VA Office of General Counsel not been a No Show in the entire process (who knows what closet they were cowering in during the criminal proceedings) there would not have been an indictment.

The VA Regional Counsel in Detroit, Michigan, with jurisdiction over Wisconsin, had no knowledge of the indictment at the time Roberts' criminal trial began, as required by administrative law regulations.

The VA Regional Office in Detroit and the VA OIG had attempted the same ploy on a decorated WW II veteran in Michigan a few years earlier. We were able to increase that veteran's benefits to the Special Monthly Compensation rate for his war wounds. When he died he was receiving about $3,500.00 per month. We were never able to recover the $ 50,000.00 that VA stole from him and his family when they created the false overpayment in his case.

The VA had put him in overpayment and then attempted to have him prosecuted for fraud like Roberts.  Our U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan had the integrity to tell the VA OIG to go to hell. The political hacks in Milwaukee were only too happy to do the bidding of the Bush-Cheney White House and make an 'example' of Keith Roberts.

Roberts was to be the poster boy for PTSD fraud. The 'welfare Cadillac' of veterans benefits.

PTSD fraud at VA is like voter fraud on a national level. There is no 'there' there.

Most of the real fraud turns out to be VA staff and Service Officers, not individual veterans.

Most of the real waste to the taxpayers is in executive compensation and bonuses.

Where else but VA can you have an 85 percent error rate and get a promotion and bonus in the same year?

Maybe on Wall Street in a mortgage unit. Other than that, can’t think of an example.

Justice delayed is not justice in full measure. Veterans are not third-class citizens. They are entitled to the same due process a mass murderer is afforded.

High time the basic due process and the protection of the Administrative Procedures Act is imposed on the VA.

The path through which American citizens can impact the regulation-rulemaking process is through the federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act, mandating federal agencies solicit public comment before instituting new rules and regulations that implement legislative acts such as the Veterans Judicial Review Act and other statutes intended to help veterans, their families and our country.

Proposed VA Rule Will Hammer Veterans, If Adopted

Time to screw our veterans again

Jamie Reno has an exclusive piece on a new proposed rule by the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) (VA) that will slap away veterans seeking disability benefits after the VA's Veterans Benefits Administration screw up veterans' claims. 

Reno notes an almost identical piece of legislation, HR 1404, in being considered in the House and studied in the Senate. Concerned readers should contact their House reps.

Screwing up veterans' claims is the norm.

Justice John Roberts in oral arguments in Astrue v. Ratliff (No. 08-1322) (2010):

"In litigating with veterans, the government more often than not takes a position that is substantially unjustified?"

- Yes

Justice Roberts: This is "really startling." 

The VA benefits claim procedures are supposed to be non-adversarial, in effect paternalistic, under the Veterans' Judicial Review Act of 1988 (VJRA). And the proposed regulation, RIN 2900-AO81, is substantially insulting and would block veterans who need our help as they come home.

Notes Reno: "Under current law, veterans are able to simply write a letter to apply for and/or to appeal a claim. No form necessary, no special language needed. This policy has actually been a welcome protection for veterans for veterans with disabilities that limit their cognitive functions."

This new anti-veteran proposed rule would make the benefits process adversarial and turn the VBA into one huge, mean-spirited health insurance company for our veterans, emphatically so for the large numbers of veterans with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI).

What you can do now

Written public comments may be submitted through www.regulations.gov; by mail or hand-delivery to the Director, Regulations Management (02REG),
Department of Veterans Affairs,
810 Vermont Avenue NW., Room 1068,
Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273-9026. (This is not a toll-free number.)

Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to “RIN 2900-AO81—Standard Claims and Appeals Forms.”

Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 461-4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll-free number.) In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at www.regulations.gov.
---
Writes Reno:

Glenn Bergmann, a partner at Bergmann and Moore, a Washington D.C.-area law firm that solely represents veterans with VA disability claims, has studied the proposal and the relevant case law. He tells Veteran Journal that, "While on the surface these proposed regulations look veteran-friendly, they really are not."

Bergmann says that if approved this VA proposal will "gut decades of veteran-friendly case law by eliminating reasonably raised claims made by veterans. If VA’s proposed regulation goes into effect and forces veterans to use only VA’s forms, then VA tilts the scales of justice from a pro-veteran claim system to an anti-veteran process."

Bergmann adds that veterans with mental health issues such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) will be at a particular disadvantage if VA’s proposed regulation is adopted.

A Veteran on Mitt Romney

This was sent my way by Bob Walsh, Vietnam War veteran and attorney who helps fellow veterans get their deserved benefits. Do not believe some veterans get over being dissed as easily as the Chickenhawk ticket would like.

Fed agencies spied on employees

"According to government records, the FDA, DEA and VA within the last five years all bought software from SpectorSoft Corp., a Vero Beach, Fla.-based company that on its website describes itself as providing 'PC/Internet monitoring and surveillance products' for users including the government."

Employee surveillance raises concerns for whistleblowers, but Bob Walsh—a friend of this site—has been telling veterans' advocates and other attorneys for years that the VA spies on VA employees and attorneys representing veterans who believe their objectives and goals are helping veterans rightfully obtain benefits.

Walsh is a a former VA staff attorney (1990-92), Army veteran and now veterans' advocate.

A piece just out by Jenna Greene and Todd Ruger at the National Law Journal reports "Government-contract records show that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (V.A.) purchased spy software from the same company that supplied the FDA's computer monitoring program, according to the database USAspending.gov."

Alerted to the Greene-Ruger piece, attorney Walsh said, "Not only did VA purchase the (SpectorSoft) software, they used it. On two occasions I busted VA streaming my emails. I have every confidence that I was not the only victim of this illegal surveillance. The VA conducts illegal electronic surveillance as well as they process disability claims. Which is with total ineptitude. So I have confirmation that they were doing it, and Greene and Ruger are shining some light in the corners so the rats will run."

By Jenna Greene and Todd Ruger at the National Law Journal

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is under fire by Congress for monitoring the personal email accounts of agency scientists, but government-contract records show it's not the only agency that's taken steps to spy on its workers.

Government-contract records show that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (V.A.) purchased spy software from the same company that supplied the FDA's computer monitoring program, according to the database USAspending.gov.

The VA and Toxins: See No Evil, Cure No Evil

(via 91outcomes.com) - The military medical corps in the various branches have been responsible for some of the great leaps forward in treating battle injuries. The Veterans Administration has tried to match the treatment level provided at military hospitals with long term programs that over the years have met with varying degrees of success. But with the exception of battlefield gas, the military brass and the VA bureaucracy have chosen to act like ostriches over toxics exposure for nearly one hundred years. After every war it has taken years for the VA to acknowledge the impact of toxins in military environments and even longer for them to accept responsibility for treatment.

By Ben Stillwater, Freelance Writer, AsbestosNews.com

The Asbestos Epidemic

The 800,000 – plus lawsuits over asbestos exposure are old news today. But when World War II veterans, especially Navy veterans, began to develop mesothelioma and asbestosis thirty years after the war was over, the reaction from the military infrastructure was, “It wasn’t us.” It took the illness of tens of thousands of shipyard workers and Navy veterans who were exposed to asbestos insulation, asbestos sprays, asbestos gaskets, asbestos bearing packing, and the asbestos fabric used for fire protection to convince the VA that there was a problem. Between about 1930 and 1975 every Navy ship commissioned contained tons of asbestos insulation. The military bases and barracks built during that era contained flooring, roofing, ceiling tiles, insulation, joint compound, and cement that were laced with asbestos.

It can still be a challenge for veterans who have developed mesothelioma and who were exposed to asbestos during active duty, to prove to the VA that the exposure occurred during time of service. In the meantime thousands of critically ill veterans were denied treatment for a lethal form of cancer or for asbestosis, which is a progressive, non-curable, respiratory illness that slowly reduces breathing capacity. While most of those veterans are gone, the VA is still often reluctant to treat asbestos related illness as a service-related condition.

Agent Orange

The story of Agent Orange and its impact on Vietnam-era vets has played out on a public stage, with much more press coverage of and commentary on the issue than occurred with asbestos. For an interminable period of time veterans complained about various illnesses and the military command structure was resolute in denying any connection between the herbicides and veteran complaints. It’s been a very slow turn to the situation today, when the VA provides volumes of information on Agent Orange-related illnesses and health issues. The lawsuits started in 1979.

In 1983 as the result of a class action lawsuit, several chemical companies involved with the manufacture of Agent Orange set up a $180 million trust fund to pay damage claims filed by veterans who could claim “total disability” as the result of exposure to the herbicides. However the guidelines for claim recognition, the requirements for proof of illness and the window of opportunity for filing those claims led to fewer than 50,000 paid claims. The lawsuits have continued with no real civil restitution for the additional hundreds of thousands of veterans who may have been exposed, but the VA has slowly come to terms with the health damage that Agent Orange did to an entire generation of combat veterans. In 2003 the acknowledged link between Agent Orange and chronic lymphocytic leukemia; other diseases have followed.

Gulf War Syndrome

This generation’s battlefield poison has taken less time for recognition from the VA, but only because the number of impacted veterans is so high in relation to the number of men and women who served. As with Agent Orange, there is a collection of health problems that initially defied diagnosis as to cause. But the fact that those health problems exist is unmistakable; as this website notes over a third of the veterans who served have developed significant health problems.

The people who have gravitated to this website and certainly those who maintain it know much more about the Gulf-related health problems and their causes than we do. We can’t contribute to the body of knowledge on Gulf War Syndrome, but we can draw some parallels with previous wars, previous classes of veterans and previous responses from the military. In the case of all three wars, primary exposure to toxins was respiratory in nature. Protective measures were inadequate or nonexistent.

That’s not entirely a shortcoming of planning or logistics; in some cases such as with asbestos the danger was not widely acknowledged. What has been consistent, it seems, is the struggle to get VA recognition of and treatment for the health problems generated in these various war theaters. Sure, the health problems have been unusual, or difficult to link to a cause, but the conditions that veterans were exposed to were also unusual. Toxins cause all sorts of problems; multiple toxins cause multiple problems. Most recently the concern among Gulf War veterans has been the authorization of funds for research. A decade’s worth of tangible health problems should be a pretty good basis for clinical studies. Inertia in the VA has become an American military tradition.

Article Source:

Ben Stillwater is a freelance writer for Asbestos News, an information and news resource on the risks and dangers associated with high levels of asbestos exposure, and the related illnesses that arise from such exposure. Ben prepared this article for 91outcomes.com as a special service to Gulf War veterans.

Attorneys Fight for Veterans Against VA and VSOs

The Disabled American Veterans (DAV) organization is targeting the use of attorneys by veterans (the Attorneys for Veterans right) to obtain benefits to which veterans are entitled, sending veterans into the hands of the veritable enemy— the Veterans Service Organizations (VSOs).

The 'Attorneys for Veterans' or 'choice' legislation took effect in June 2007 and now the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) seeks a roll-back after years of working against the right of veterans to obtain legal counsel.

The adversarial system veterans face is bad enough but with the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs now being pushed by VSOs that have become part of the problem in denying and delaying veterans disability claims, the DAV seeks to make a horrible situation worse.

Don't veterans deserve the right to legal counsel as early as possible when they confront a hostile bureaucracy? Just what the hell is the DAV's problem?

A letter by veterans advocate Kurt Priessman to the Senate and House Veteran Affairs Committee Chairpersons and members reveals the main issues.

March 15, 2010

Good Evening,

Recently the DAV, after testimony by its Commander, Roberto Barrera, sought to overturn legislation providing basic choice to veterans to seek attorneys to represent them ((Public Law) P. L. 109-461) [the 'Attorneys for Veterans' legislation]. Many individuals I correspond with are in complete disagreement and feel that the Veterans Service Organizations in the rural areas cannot do an adequate job as they are undermanned, overworked, lack training and resources, and despite many representatives doing yeoman's duties are at a distinct disadvantage.

To portray attorneys as complete scoundrels is absolutely unwarranted, as is portraying veterans as complete dolts, and many veterans feel this position by the DAV is a flagrant misrepresentation fed by a definite conflict of interest. In fact, many veterans feel that there should be an expansion of the attorney - claimant relationship to allow veterans the opportunity for attorneys to begin representation at the onset of the claim.

Many of the basic fundamentals of the Constitution are denied veterans serving on active duty (Feres Doctrine, etc.), and this is no less than a restriction of a veterans right to due process. There can be little doubt that rather than being advocates for veterans, there are too many instances of delays and denials, discouragement of valid claims, and failures of the Department of Veterans Affairs adversarial system and its extensions, the VFW, the DAV, AmVets, and the American Legion.

As example, the VFW argued my claim had no merit, that it was legally held by the Haas Stay (repudiated directly by the Haas staff attorney Ethan C. Kallet, Esq.), and would not assist me in attempts to solicit information concerning any phase of my claim. In essence, they appear to be instruments of the DVA, repeating whatever the VBA says.

Please convey this sentiment to members of the Senate and House Veteran Affairs Committee Chairpersons and members of the respective Committees. There can be no less an evil than the DVA's action in Cushman vs Shinseki, (2008-7129), decided in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or the conversation with Chief Justice Roberts in Astrue vs Ratliff, who was startled that 'in litigating with veterans, the government more often than not takes a position that is substantially unjustified'. Veterans deserve a choice at the earliest opportunity possible, we cannot afford to continue a 1,000,000 claim backlog, or a process lasting eight (8) years or more to decide.

Respectfully submitted,


Kurt Priessman, MSgt, USAF (Ret)
B.A., M.B.A., C.P.M., Veteran Advocate