Showing posts with label Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Show all posts

Aug 13, 2025

VA Home Loan Program Reform Act Becomes Law

Lost in Summer, an important Veterans Home Loan Program bill was signed into law in late July.

The bill, H. R. 1815, was authored by Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wisconsin). The VA Home Loan Program Reform Act garnered wide bipartisan support.

See H.R.1815 — 119th Congress (2025-2026) for bill history.

See also U.S. Veterans Affairs Home Loans page.

Writes Rep. Van Orden in a press release this Summer:

As Chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs Economic Opportunity Subcommittee, one of my top priorities is ensuring those who’ve served our nation can achieve and maintain homeownership. However, veterans – like all Americans – can fall on hard times and may need assistance to avoid foreclosing on their home.

That is why I’m thrilled that President Trump signed my VA Home Loan Program Reform Act into law last month. This legislation establishes a permanent partial claims program within the VA Home Loan Program, bringing VA in line with other federal agencies that lend money for homes and replacing the fiscally irresponsible Biden administration-era VASP program.

This law helps fulfill a promise to those who protected us with their service and continue to do so today by providing a path to maintain homeownership – a key part of the American Dream. 

I am very proud of this legislation and thankful to President Trump for signing it into law.

Nov 12, 2017

Veterans for Due Process Helps Wisconsin Vietnam-era Vet in Years-Long Fight

Keith Roberts, veteran betrayed by the country
he served. Fight continues at Veterans Court.
Veterans Day is when we recognize sacrifice of our armed forces.

This Veterans Day, I singled out one Wisconsin veteran, Airman Keith Roberts, who served honorably
in the Vietnam War combat era in a support capacity at a Navy Air Base in Naples, Italy.

Roberts is from the small city of Gillett in northern Wisconsin. He was honorably discharged from the Navy in 1970.

But his service, his rights, and his humanity were encroached upon by the United States government in the most cruel fashion.

For listening to his veteran service officer in Shawano County Wisconsin, who advised Roberts to seek PTSD disability benefits to the time of his discharge, Roberts and his family have been hounded, harassed, investigated and ultimately railroaded with a bogus federal criminal indictment for which Roberts spent years in federal prison. Folks at the VA and the DoJ did not want Vietnam-era veterans seeking disability benefit en masse, so they went after Roberts who claimed he was traumatized when his friend was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft at the base.

Went after as in contrived a criminal indictment for Roberts' pursuing his disability claim.

The U.S. Dept of Justice in the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Stephen Biskupic, (2001-2009), indicted this Wisconsin Vietnam-era Navy veteran, (who was diagnosed with PTSD by at least five different mental health professionals), using the power of the federal prosecutor to convict and jail him on trumped-up charges of wire fraud in 2004-2005.

I spoke with Roberts by phone numerous times this year.

Roberts will never be the same man. His family will never be the same.

At Mal Contends, I have attempted to bring this shame to light the last 10 years.

Honestly, I feel I may have been shouting at the cold in a Wisconsin winter.

There is no force of unreason as unyielding the United States government protecting a bullshit prosecution.

Except for veterans.

Veterans for Due Process, Inc. and attorney Robert P. Walsh, a Vietnam combat veteran, will not stop fighting for Keith Roberts, not until they're all dead.

Veterans for Due Process, Inc. filed a Friend of the Court brief, amicus curiae, last month at the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, (CVAC), in Keith A. Roberts v. David J. Hulkin, M.D., (No. 16-1219).

There are whistle blowers in the adjudication of veterans' claims. And then there's Walsh.

Roberts, Walsh and Veterans for Due Process, Inc want Due Process for Roberts' claim in light of the bullshit prosecution that denied Roberts fundamental Constitutional rights, specifically Due Process. That's it, that's all they want: Due Process.

Writes attorney, Christian J. Grostic, in part, (pp 5-8) in a supporting brief for Roberts:

2. The Benefits-Determination Procedures ... Do Not Provide Adequate Due Process.

The VA’s usual benefits-determination procedures do not include the necessary protections mandated by the regulations, the statute, and the Constitution to investigate or adjudicate allegedly false benefits claims. In fact, using the usual procedures in such circumstances further violates veterans’ rights.

By Congress’s direction, the usual benefits-determination procedures are “strongly and uniquely proclaimant.” Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d 1356, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1998). “Congress has designed and fully intends to maintain a beneficial non-adversarial system of veterans benefits.” Id. (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 100-963, at 13 (1988)). “I[m]plicit in such a beneficial system has been an evolution of a completely exparte system of adjudication in which Congress expects [the DVA] to fully and sympathetically develop the veteran’s claim to its optimum before deciding it on the merits. Even then, [the DVA] is expected to resolve all issues by giving the claimant the benefit of any reasonable doubt.” Id. at 1362-63 (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 100-963, at 13 (1988)) (alterations in Hodge).
Congress’s expectations are codified in the applicable regulations. The VA’s adjudication regulations state that “[p]roceedings before VA are ex parte in nature.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a). They notify veterans that “it is the obligation of VA to assist a claimant in developing the facts pertinent to the claim.” Id. They instruct that when “a reasonable doubt arises regarding service origin, the degree of disability, or any other point, such doubt will be resolved in favor the claimant.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.
Because they are designed to be ex parte and claimant-friendly, the usual benefits determination procedures do not include the due-process protections necessary in an adversarial proceeding, such as the investigation and adjudication of fraud allegations. As Congress stated, “[i]n such a beneficial structure there is no room for such adversarial concepts as cross examination, best evidence rule, hearsay evidence exclusion or strict adherence to burden of proof.” Hodge, 155 F.3d at 1362 (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 100-963, at 13 (1988)). The regulations follow this principle. Although a veteran is entitled to a hearing on an issue that arises under part 3, the purpose is solely to permit him to introduce additional evidence. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(c)(2). There is no mechanism for the veteran to obtain discovery or confront witnesses regarding the allegations against him, because such allegations are not governed by this scheme at all. There are no rules keeping separate the roles of investigating officials, prosecutors, and adjudicating officials, because those roles are not part of the claimant-friendly process.

Where the VA is truly on the veteran’s side, these procedures provide the minimum due process necessary for non-adversarial claims adjudication. But where VA staff become ad hoc investigators and prosecutors, the regulations’ minimal formal procedures allow those employees to use their access to the veteran and wide discretion to pursue and reinforce any allegations they choose, base their determinations on whatever evidentiary rules or burdens they see fit, and record their conclusions in the veteran’s file without a fair opportunity to refute them. These are the dangers of informal, ex parte proceedings, and why the procedures in part 42 are mandatory for any fraud allegations.

Moreover, the VA violates additional rights of veterans when its staff abuse the proclaimant regulations in part 3 to pursue anti-claimant allegations. Part 3 promises veterans that the VA will assist them in developing their claims, and veterans rely on that promise when they give statements, provide evidence, and otherwise cooperate with VA staff. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a). When those government employees secretly violate that promise, particularly when they pursue quasi-criminal fraud allegations, they can coerce veterans into providing evidence against themselves or making involuntary statements in violation of the Fifth Amendment. See, e.g., Hopkins v. Cockrell, 325 F.3d 579, 585 (5th Cir. 2003) (promise that conversation was confidential rendered confession involuntary); United States v. Walton, 10 F.3d 1024, 1030 (3d Cir. 1993) (government agents unconstitutionally coerced statement by promising confidentiality to suspect, who did not know he was under criminal investigation); cf. Lynumn v. Illinois, 372 U.S. 528, 534 (1963) (police unconstitutionally coerced statement by threatening that government would cut off suspect’s benefits if she did not “cooperate”). This is yet another reason why the VA must follow the procedures in part 42 if it pursues fraud allegations administratively. ...

Legally, what the DoJ and the VA did to Keith Roberts is a case that is a no-brainer; it's wholly improper and unconstitutional.

Politically, most folks don' give a shit. But stay tuned. This is the first time I felt optimistic about Keith Roberts in a long time.


Jan 16, 2014

Rumbles from Veterans About New VA Rule for Disabilities

Help for veterans or vile insurance company
The question needs to be asked: Is the Obama administration all-in on helping veterans, or is it veering into the neocon territory of its predecessor?

Jamie Reno has the story in an exclusive at: Is VA deliberately blocking disabled from benefits? And it sure ain't good.

The VA (DVA) is pushing a change in disability applications that could stiff veterans in a manner the rightwing American Enterprise Institute could only dream.

"The scope of this proposal is enormous. If adopted, every year, hundreds of thousands of disabled veterans’ claims and appeals will get shot down by VA before the agency even reviews them," notes Michael Zacchea, a board member at Veterans for Common Sense.

If anyone sees an interest in helping veterans, check out Reno's piece.

The VA and its Veterans Benefit Administration are starting to look again like a particularly hostile health insurance company.

Sep 13, 2013

VA Execs Will Leave if Congress Bans Their Bonuses

Keith Roberts - Jailed and convicted
thorough prosecution
by
Wisconsin U.S. Atty, Steven Biskupic
(2001-2008) for tenaciously pursuing
his disability benefits claims
President Obama's Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA, VA) has been a sea change from the Bush-Cheney years.

This is due in part because radical changes in VA disability benefit policies the last three years on Agent Orange et al, and PTSD, to the shrieks of neocons.

And in no small part because the DVA (VA) national Director of Compensation and Pension Services no longer colludes with corrupt US Attys and prosecutes and imprisons Vietnam-era veterans for filing for PTSD disability claims.

But I ran across this story this morning VA Execs Will Leave if Congress Bans Bonuses, Group Says.

You see VA employees are actually pocketing hefty bonuses from the clerks to the executives.

No VA employee should be getting any bonuses.

I say to the VA execs: Leave now.

Before 2003 Iraq Invasion, veterans' advocate Steve Robinson warned the Bush-Cheney administration about the coming toll on veterans and what a moron could guess would be a huge caseload of disability claims.

The Bush administration blew Robinson off:

"[We understood the Iraq War] was going to be different, and that it was going to be house-to-house and urban combat. And that type of warfare requires a surge, if you will, and the ability to have mental- health-care treatment available, closer to the front, and also available when they come back home. The harder and uglier the war is, the more the psychological toll is on the human mind. In that meeting [in the spring of 2002], they [DoD staff and Dr. William Winkenwerder, then-Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs] looked at us as if we were people from outer space, wondering why we were there. They patted us on the back and told us they had everything under control, and they would be able to take care of any contingencies that might pop up. And that turned out not to be true."

You want to solve the veterans' claims backlog problem, you hire a bunch of young techies and let them work; and you appoint as VA executives veterans' advocates like Steve Robinson, Paul Sullivan and Robert Walsh.

Mar 24, 2012

Paul Ryan Budget Ignores Veterans, Not Even a Mention

Paul Ryan is all smiles, veterans get no love or mention

The federal budget is a statement of priorities. In the Rep. Paul Ryan's version of the 2013 budget subsequently embraced by Gov. Mitt Romney, the word veteran never appears.

The budget proposal runs to 98 pages. Zero mention of veterans. Two protracted conflicts, high veteran unemployment and a multitude of coming home issues and not one mention of veterans in this budget proposal.

It clearly states that veterans are NOT a priority.

This budget proposal is worse than an empty thanks for your service, an empty thanks would require being mentioned. Veterans did not even make the list of prioirites. Veterans were ignored entirely. Veterans are essentially being told thanks for nothing, you are on your own. This is absolutely unacceptable. Especially coming from an aspiring commander-in-chief.

By Patrick Bellon and Christopher Miller

Now contrast that with the 2013 budget the President recently unveiled that clearly makes veterans a top priority. The contrast is very stark.

With a new generation of veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the few significant increases in the executive’s 2013 budget is to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs,which would be increased by 10%. This increase addresses issues facing veterans ranging from mental health to homelessness. It even addresses the needs of the growing female veterans population. Most importantly it budgets for needed increases in health care and disablity compensation.

But the budget mostly cuts. For every $1 in revenue raised from those making $250,000 annually and closing corporate tax loopholes, it cuts $2.50 from the budget. In ten years it will cut virtually the same amount of all discretionary spending for 2013. This was a target agreed upon by both Democrats and Republicans.

The media has reported that President Obama’s 2013 budget is controversial, though it reflects bipartisan agreement in Congress that discretionary spending should be reduced by $1 trillion over ten years. It allows the Bush tax cuts that have mostly benefitted the wealthiest Americans to expire. It institutes the ‘Buffet Rule’ that no household making over $1 million a year will pay less than 30% in taxes. It also includes the Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee on America’s biggest financial institutions who contributed to the financial crisis to ensure every cent of taxpayer funds from the TARP are paid back to the federal government.

So where is the controversy? The budget still projects a $901 billion shortfall. In the $3.6 trillion proposal, $2.5 trillion, about 70%, is ‘mandatory’ spending, which means that the money must be spent according to laws passed by Congress. The other $1.1 trillion is ‘discretionary’ spending, meaning this is money the President would like to spend. To ‘balance the budget’, as many in Congress are calling for, would mean cutting out all discretionary spending except for around $200 billion.

This sounds easier than it is, especially when the cost of defense maintenance and operations is $272 billion alone. Virtually all defense spending is discretionary and the President’s budget already includes billions of dollars in defense cuts in procurement, operations, bases, and personnel. Discretionary spending increases in the budget include Veterans healthcare, student aid, the State Department, and housing. To balance the budget in 2013 would mean mothballing the Pentagon and State Department, as well as veterans’ healthcare, student aid, and the federal prison system. And that would just be for one year. It wouldn’t even begin to pay down the national debt which we have accumulated over decades.

Americans have gotten used to demanding government provide services we all want and benefit from, but refuse to pay higher revenue, or taxes, to fund them. This seems to include paying for the true costs of war,if the Ryan-Romney 2013 budget is any indication. This is unacceptable.

The budget discourse takes place on intellectually dishonest terms. Who would provide the services everyone is accustomed to if this budget was passed? Some of the most vital services the government provides no private sector firm can or would provide. What private firm could provide a military? Even private defense contractors employ former soldiers trained by the U.S. military. Private intelligence contractors do the same. Who would build and maintain roads and airports and secure them? Firms may build roads and airports where and when they need them, but they wouldn’t build them beyond their own need for capacity or use. Even if the government got out of the healthcare and Social Security game altogether, individual Americans would still have to pay for these services out of pocket.

President Obama’s 2013 budget should not controversial. Most of the President’s budget (like all budgets) is controlled by laws passed by Congress. If Sen. McCain were sitting in the White House today instead of President Obama, he would be facing the same problems. Americans support preserving and continuing Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. They want a strong national security apparatus, good infrastructure, and education. Americans also overwhelmingly support our military and veterans,one of the few issues most agree on regardless of party. As a nation we must take a hard look at our values and realize that all of these things cost money and must be paid for. It isn’t a choice of which or how much; it is a choice of either/or. Either we decide we don’t want these things and don’t have to pay for them or we decide we do and we pay the what is required. Great countries require investment and hardwork, not dishonest conversations that allow us to shirk our responsibilities. As americans we must set priorities that live up to our highest ideals and values.

President Obama’s budget proposal makes sense and displays a very different set of priorities than the Ryan budget. Veterans occupy a preeminent place within that set of priorities, especially compared to being completely ignored. It is a balance of cuts and revenue increases. It provides for the programs Americans overwhelmingly support. It continues to fund programs we need to help our economy grow out of this economic downturn.

Oct 18, 2011

Lawsuit Claims VA Negligent in Iraq War Veteran Suicide

Some Vietnam War guy; makes me laugh and advocate for veterans

By Kristin M. Hall

The widow of an Iraq war veteran from Tennessee claims in a lawsuit that the Veterans Affairs was negligent in failing to diagnose and treat his post-traumatic stress disorder before he committed suicide in 2008.

The suit filed Tuesday in federal court in Greeneville says staff at the VA hospital in Mountain Home did not adequately treat Scott Walter Eiswert, of Greeneville, before his suicide at the age of 31. Eiswert, who served with the Tennessee National Guard, served in Iraq in 2004 and 2005.

The family's lawsuit is the latest criticism of the VA's response to preventing suicide among veterans and dealing with a massive backlog of benefits claims. Similar lawsuits have been filed against the VA by families of veterans who have committed suicide after seeking help at VA facilities.
A political debate outside the sphere of the popular news media, and restricted among rightwing thinktanks and their allies [included media allies such as Associated Press writer Allen Breed] contending veterans [especially Vietnam War veterans] ought to leave their war experiences behind, against veterans' advocates who back disability benefits for all veterans over the course of their lives, continues on the questions of whether PTSD and other ailments are life-long and the question of what we as a country owe to our some 26-million veterans.

One Vietnam War Army combat veteran, Bob Walsh, an attorney battling the VA for his fellow veterans and a critic of the VA response to preventing suicide, told me:

What about the claims of all the honest veterans that languish in the system for decades until they die. [Veterans] ... freeze to death on the streets or blow their brains out in the garage. The veterans' benefits claims system is a national tragedy ... .
For an opposing view, as proposed most prominantly by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and implemented in part by the Bush-Cheney administration, see Blaming the Veteran. If you surf to Dr. Sally Satel's work at AEI, just read the summary if I may advise, because Satel may make you want to fucking puke.

Oct 26, 2010

New Medical Forms Will Streamline Veterans Claims Process

- Physician Questionnaires to Boost Disability Exam Efficiency -

WASHINGTON – The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has released three new disability benefits questionnaires for physicians of Veterans applying for VA disability compensation benefits. This initiative marks the beginning of a major reform of the physicians’ guides and automated routines that will streamline the claims process for injured or ill Veterans.

“This is a major step in the transformation of VA’s business processes that is yielding improvements for Veterans as we move to eliminate the disability claims backlog by 2015,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki.

These new questionnaires are the first of 79 disability benefits questionnaires that will guide Veterans’ personal physicians, as well as VA physicians, in the evaluation of the most frequent medical conditions affecting Veterans.

Accurate and timely medical evaluations are a critical element of VA’s continued commitment to high-quality and prompt decisions about the nature and degree of conditions afflicting Veterans. Streamlining this process by directly involving Veterans’ treating physicians in providing specific information needed to evaluate their claims will lead to completeness in the examination and faster compensation decisions.

VA’s goal is to process all claims in fewer than 125 days with a decision quality rate no lower than 98 percent, a mark Secretary Shinseki has mandated by 2015. The physician questionnaire project is one of more than three dozen initiatives actively underway at VA, including a major technology modernization that will lead to paperless claims processing.

The disability benefits questionnaires are part of VA’s automated health records system which prompts VA physicians conducting disability examinations to include precise information in a standardized way to assist claims adjudicators in ensuring



Veterans receive the benefits they deserve as quickly as possible. These VA examination results are electronically available to claims adjudicators in VA regional offices.

For Veterans who receive their care from private physicians, VA has placed the disability benefits questionnaires on its Internet site (http://www.vba.va.gov/disabilityexams) with instructions for physicians to submit examination results on Veterans’ behalf.

The first three questionnaires cover B-cell leukemia (such as hairy-cell leukemia), Parkinson’s disease and ischemic heart disease. VA recently published a final regulation to be implemented Oct. 30 that will establish the presumption of eligibility to VA disability compensation benefits for Veterans with one of these three conditions who were exposed to Agent Orange, a herbicide agent used extensively in Vietnam.

In practical terms, Veterans who served in Vietnam during the war who have a “presumed” illness do not have to prove an association between their illnesses and their military service. This “presumption” establishes eligibility to VA compensation if their condition is disabling to a compensable level.

For additional information on the VA disability compensation program or additional presumptive disabilities for Veterans exposed to herbicide agents, contact VA at 800-827-1000 or visit http://www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/AO/claimherbicide.htm.

Aug 30, 2010

VA Publishes Final Regulation to Aid Veterans Exposed to Agent Orange Tuesday

- The final regulation follows Shinseki’s determination to expand the list of conditions for which service connection for Vietnam Veterans is presumed. VA is adding Parkinson’s disease and ischemic heart disease and expanding chronic lymphocytic leukemia to include all chronic B cell leukemias, such as hairy cell leukemia. Agent Orange Illnesses' Final Rules published Tuesday in the Federal Registry. -

Sen. James Webb (D-VA) will hold a September 2010 Veterans Affairs Hearing [on Disability Compensation: Presumptive Agent Orange Disability Decision-Making], presumably to apologize to a skeptical veterans community about Webb's attempt to delay the implementation of the new rules and the expanded list of illnesses presumed to be caused by Agent Orange and other herbicides.

From the VA:

VA Health Care and Benefits Provided for Many Vietnam Veterans

WASHINGTON – Veterans exposed to herbicides while serving in Vietnam and other areas will have an easier path to access quality health care and qualify for disability compensation under a final regulation that will be published on August 31, 2010 in the Federal Register by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The new rule expands the list of health problems VA will presume to be related to Agent Orange and other herbicide exposures to add two new conditions and expand one existing category of conditions.

“Last October, based on the requirements of the Agent Orange Act of 1991 and the Institute of Medicine’s 2008 Update on Agent Orange, I determined that the evidence provided was sufficient to award presumptions of service connection for these three additional diseases,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki. “It was the right decision, and the President and I are proud to finally provide this group of Veterans the care and benefits they have long deserved.”

The final regulation follows Shinseki’s determination to expand the list of conditions for which service connection for Vietnam Veterans is presumed. VA is adding Parkinson’s disease and ischemic heart disease and expanding chronic lymphocytic leukemia to include all chronic B cell leukemias, such as hairy cell leukemia.

In practical terms, Veterans who served in Vietnam during the war and who have a “presumed” illness don’t have to prove an association between their medical problems and their military service. By helping Veterans overcome evidentiary requirements that might otherwise present significant challenges, this “presumption” simplifies and speeds up the application process and ensure that Veterans receive the benefits they deserve.

The Secretary’s decision to add these presumptives is based on the latest evidence provided in a 2008 independent study by the Institute of Medicine concerning health problems caused by herbicides like Agent Orange.

Veterans who served in Vietnam anytime during the period beginning January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, are presumed to have been exposed to herbicides.

More than 150,000 Veterans are expected to submit Agent Orange claims in the next 12 to 18 months, many of whom are potentially eligible for retroactive disability payments based on past claims. Additionally, VA will review approximately 90,000 previously denied claims by Vietnam Veterans for service connection for these conditions. All those awarded service-connection who are not currently eligible for enrollment into the VA healthcare system will become eligible.

This historic regulation is subject to provisions of the Congressional Review Act that require a 60-day Congressional review period before implementation. After the review period, VA can begin paying benefits for new claims and may award benefits retroactively for earlier periods. For new claims, VA may pay benefits retroactive to the effective date of the regulation or to one year before the date VA receives the application, whichever is later. For pending claims and claims that were previously denied, VA may pay benefits retroactive to the date it received the claim.

VA encourages Vietnam Veterans with these three diseases to submit their applications for access to VA health care and compensation now so the agency can begin development of their claims.

Individuals can go to a website at http://www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/AO/claimherbicide.htm to get an understanding of how to file a claim for presumptive conditions related to herbicide exposure, as well as what evidence is needed by VA to make a decision about disability compensation or survivors benefits.

Additional information about Agent Orange and VA’s services for Veterans exposed to the chemical is available at http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/.

The regulation is available on the Office of the Federal Register website at http://www.ofr.gov/.

Aug 7, 2010

Another casualty of war, another suicide; Will no one blame the war?

- Another soldier’s suicide underscores the VA’s enormous challenge: Keeping veterans alive, as the U.S. Army last week in a maddeningly obtuse report blames "high risk behavior" of troops at home and "erosion of adherence to existing Army policies and standards." ... "[Iraq war veteran Iraq war veteran Kortney Jensen] was never the same person after he came home,” said father-in-law, Grant Becherini. “It was a different Kort that came back. The real Kort died over there." Not according to the Army. -
By Matthew D. LaPlante The Salt Lake Tribune

The demons would always be there. Just over his shoulder, just within earshot, just close enough to remind him that his life would never be what it was.

They would keep him from sleeping. They would befuddle him in the midst of simple tasks. And, on occasion, they would entreat him to end it all.

But Kortney Jensen was a fighter. He had endured two tours of duty in Iraq, survived more than 75 roadside bomb detonations and was twice awarded the Purple Heart.

And in this new fight, he was well armed. He had the unconditional support of his family. He was plugged into mental health treatment at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Salt Lake City. And he was looking forward to the future: a friend’s wedding, a vacation with his mother and the birth of his second daughter.

With all of that to live for and more, the 27-year-old Army veteran had made it through some very dark days. He’d beaten back the demons.

But he could not destroy them.

—

‘We are getting better’ » Since 2001, the U.S. Department of Defense has acknowledged the deaths of more than 5,600 military members in Iraq and Afghanistan ­— a grim, flag-draped tally that has contributed to a significant loss of support for two once-popular wars.

But the count is incomplete. The Department of Veterans Affairs believes that more than 6,000 veterans — including many who have served in the nation’s ongoing conflicts — will commit suicide this year. VA officials say many of these deaths are as much a consequence of combat as those resulting immediately from bombs or bullets.

In the long run, the National Institute of Mental Health has estimated, suicide will eclipse roadside bombings as the leading cause of death among those who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yet it could be worse. The VA has endured years of criticism for being slow to react to the suicide crisis; some have even suggested that its behemoth bureaucracy has aggravated the mental health woes of those it was serving. But in recent years, veterans advocates have become more laudatory of the VA’s network of anti-suicide programs. Counselors working 24-7 at VA suicide hot lines have been credited with preventing thousands of deaths. And studies have shown that young veterans being treated by the VA are less likely to commit suicide than those who are not receiving services.

“I do feel like we are getting better,” said Dan Murchie, a counselor who works in a clinic for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at the VA hospital in Salt Lake City. “I think we’re starting to get a reputation as the team that can get things done, the team that can cut through the bull — the red tape — and help them get what they need to get better.”

One irony: Improvements in the way Murchie’s team works to prevent suicide have often come as a result of evaluating where they might have failed veterans like Jensen, who shot himself in the garage of a friend’s home on July 31.

“Right off, I ask: ‘Do I know this guy? When was the last time my team had interaction with him? What more could we have done?’  ” Murchie said.

Those were the same questions Murchie asked following the 2007 suicide of Iraq war veteran Jason Ermer.

Ermer’s mother said the Army abandoned her son, forcing him out of the service after he returned from combat with symptoms of post-traumatic stress. She believes that the care he received from the VA was inconsistent at best ­­— and dehumanizing at worst.

“He was heartbroken,” Rosa Ermer said in 2009. “He went over to Iraq, he served his country with pride, and then they took everything away from him. They knew he had problems and they didn’t take care of him.” Murchie ­— who made the call to police that led to the discovery of the Ermer’s soldier’s body — said he will always question whether he could have done more to save the soldier. All he can do now, though, is learn from the past and move forward.

But sometimes, he said, the answer is that “we did the best we could ... and that’s the most frustrating thing of all.”

—

‘He’d want to go, too’ » Jensen was working on a ranch in Idaho when he heard about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Soon he was in a soldier’s uniform. And it wasn’t too long after that he was called into the fight.

His posting with the 3rd Infantry Division wasn’t a glamorous job, but someone needed to lay asphalt to replace roads being destroyed by insurgent bombs near Balad, in northern Iraq.

“We were too embarrassed to tell people what we did,” Jensen’s friend, Josh Hansen, recalled. “We were trained as combat engineers. We went over there to blow stuff up, but all we were doing was fixing things that other people had blown up.”

Mortars dropped onto the base every day, exploding this way and that. Sometimes the bombs were deadly, but mostly the blasts were a nuisance. Sometimes when the alarms sounded Jensen and Hansen would race to the mess hall, hoping to make it through the doors before the base was locked down for safety. Say what you will about Army food, they found it better to be locked in than locked out.

“We really became very close during that year,” Hansen remembered.

So close that, when Hansen decided to volunteer for a return trip to Iraq, Jensen was right at his heels.

“I purposefully didn’t tell Kortney about it, because I knew that if I told him he’d want to go, too, and I had so much love for him that I just didn’t want to see him go back there,” Hansen said. “So I waited until just five days before I was supposed to leave. I figured he wouldn’t be able to get orders that fast.”

He was wrong.

‘These disorders can ebb and flow’: Post-traumatic stress disorder is an exasperatingly inequitable disease.

For some, the experiences that Jensen had during his first tour in Iraq — dodging mortar attacks on base and rolling “outside the wire” on bomb-laden roads — could be enough to trigger a lifetime of anxiety, fear and hyper-vigilance. Other soldiers weather such experiences with relative ease, suffering only when repeatedly exposed to great levels of violence over a long period of time. And still others appear to be immune altogether.

Treatment results for those who suffer from PTSD are also uneven.

“Some people just don’t respond to treatment,” said Jennifer Romesser, a neuropsychologist at the Salt Lake VA. “The vast majority of people do well — they see significant recovery — but these disorders can ebb and flow over time.”

Nearly 10,000 veterans are being treated for PTSD at the Salt Lake VA. Complicating matters for many of those individuals, and particularly for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is an injury that is fast becoming the trademark wound of the anti-insurgent warfare era: traumatic brain injury caused by the concussive, brain-rattling force of improvised bomb blasts.

Researchers have a great deal of information on brain injuries related to civilian accidents — falls, car crashes, sports injuries and industrial explosions. The worst of those injuries are thought to be similar in nature to what soldiers suffer in roadside bomb blasts. What is less certain, however, is what happens when brain injuries are combined with psychological wounds.

“Brain injuries could certainly contribute and exasperate the difficulties and symptoms of PTSD,” Romesser said.

One troubling symptom inherent to both conditions: impulsivity, or the inclination to engage in dangerous, deadly or even suicidal behavior without forethought. And veterans, Romesser noted, often have the means to act quickly upon suicidal impulses.

“In some cases, when they come home, they are never comfortable being disarmed,” Romesser said. “So they keep a weapon near them at all times. It’s deeply ingrained in them, but it can also be a risk factor.”

More than half of veterans’ suicides involve a firearm.

‘We were saving lives’ » Jensen’s second tour of duty began in the fall of 2007. This time, instead of building roads, he was responsible for clearing them. Night after night, his team of bomb hunters from the 321st Engineers of Boise, Idaho, set off in heavily armored vehicles in search of the hidden killers buried under the roads of Iraq’s volatile Anbar Province.

“We were pretty damn good at it,” said fellow soldier Chris Koeppel. “Kort was a huge part of that. He was a quick thinker. He was always right up front when things were going down.”

Jensen, a sergeant, and his team took pride in finding more bombs than anyone else — even though the way they found many was when their vehicles were rocked by explosions. “Better that we find them that way than for others who had less armor,” Koeppel said. “We were saving lives.”

In late July of 2007, a massive bomb detonated under Jensen’s vehicle, violently slamming the soldier against the inside walls of the machine.

Against his pleas, Jensen was evacuated from Iraq, first to a hospital in Germany, and later to Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas. There, he convalesced with military members who had been badly burned and lost limbs in roadside bomb blasts, the very sort of explosions his team had worked so hard to prevent.

“He felt like they deserved to be there a lot more than he did,” said Jensen’s wife, Laura. “He felt like his injuries were nothing compared to anyone else’s.”

The military and the VA disagreed. So did Jensen’s mother. “His body hurt all over,” said Mary Heiner. “His head, his neck, his spine. All of him hurt. He couldn’t sleep. He had night terrors. He couldn’t concentrate. He was just struggling so much.”

“He was never the same person after he came home,” said Jensen’s father-in-law, Grant Becherini. “It was a different Kort that came back. The real Kort died over there.”

Ultimately, the VA would rate Jensen completely disabled. It was not a badge he wore with pride, but he struggled to build a new life for himself. He took up trapping. He joined a veterans’ motorcycle club. And he sought and received counseling at the VA.Slowly, family members said, Jensen seemed to have climbed out from the darkness. “He was always talking about the future,” Laura Jensen said. “All the time we talked about things we were going to do. We talked about the baby we were about to have.”

No one knows why Jensen ultimately decided to take his life. He didn’t tell anyone he was considering suicide. He didn’t leave a note.

—

No one is to blame » Andrew Wittwer knows he can’t save them all.

The case manager has worked at the Salt Lake VA for eight years, a period coinciding with an onslaught of new patients from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Early on, he concedes, the VA wasn’t up to the challenge. But over time, he believes, the system has gotten much better at keeping veterans from falling through the cracks.

But sometimes, he said, veterans won’t take advantage of all the services they are offered. And other times, he lamented, those services aren’t enough to combat the problems they face.

Nine veterans who were enrolled in the Salt Lake VA have killed themselves since October, officials reported.

“It’s heartbreaking,” Wittwer said. “There are challenges that I just can’t solve for them. There are things that are out of my control. ... All I can do is try to catch every possible scenario I can.”

The VA will conduct investigations into Jensen’s suicide in search of anything that could have been done to prevent his death.

But at least among Jensen’s family, the consensus is that the VA did all it could. “Sometimes things just happen,” Heiner said. “And no one is to blame.”

But if, in the process of investigating her son’s death, the VA comes upon something it could have done to save her boy’s life, Heiner said she would not be angry, but hopeful. “Whatever we can do now to save other people, we should,” she said. “That is the only good that comes from something like this.”

Jul 10, 2010

President Obama: Fixing VA and Providing More Help for Veterans with PTSD

- President Obama: "But for years, many veterans with PTSD who have tried to seek benefits – veterans of today’s wars and earlier wars – have often found themselves stymied. They’ve been required to produce evidence proving that a specific event caused their PTSD. And that practice has kept the vast majority of those with PTSD who served in non-combat roles, but who still waged war, from getting the care they need." -

In his weekly radio and Internet address on July 20, 1010, President Obama says the government will make it easier for veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder to receive federal benefits

---
The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release July 10, 2010 Weekly Address: President Obama Announces Changes to Help Veterans with PTSD Receive the Benefits They Need
WASHINGTON – In this week’s address, President Barack Obama announced that on Monday the Department of Veterans Affairs, led by Secretary Shinseki, will begin to make it easier for veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder to receive the benefits they need. For many years, veterans with PTSD have been stymied in receiving benefits by requirements they produce evidence proving a specific event caused the PTSD. Streamlining this process will help not just the veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars, but generations of veterans who have served and sacrificed for the country.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
As Prepared for Delivery
Weekly Address
July 10, 2010

Last weekend, on the Fourth of July, Michelle and I welcomed some of our extraordinary military men and women and their families to the White House.

They were just like the thousands of active duty personnel and veterans I’ve met across this country and around the globe. Proud. Strong. Determined. Men and women with the courage to answer their country’s call, and the character to serve the United States of America.

Because of that service; because of the honor and heroism of our troops around the world; our people are safer, our nation is more secure, and we are poised to end our combat mission in Iraq by the end of August, completing a drawdown of more than 90,000 troops since last January.

Still, we are a nation at war. For the better part of a decade, our men and women in uniform have endured tour after tour in distant and dangerous places. Many have risked their lives. Many have given their lives. And as a grateful nation, humbled by their service, we can never honor these American heroes or their families enough.

Just as we have a solemn responsibility to train and equip our troops before we send them into harm’s way, we have a solemn responsibility to provide our veterans and wounded warriors with the care and benefits they’ve earned when they come home.

That is our sacred trust with all who serve – and it doesn’t end when their tour of duty does.

To keep that trust, we’re building a 21st century VA, increasing its budget, and ensuring the steady stream of funding it needs to support medical care for our veterans.

To help our veterans and their families pursue a college education, we’re funding and implementing the post-9/11 GI Bill.

To deliver better care in more places, we’re expanding and increasing VA health care, building new wounded warrior facilities, and adapting care to better meet the needs of female veterans.

To stand with those who sacrifice, we’ve dedicated new support for wounded warriors and the caregivers who put their lives on hold for a loved one’s long recovery.

And to do right by our vets, we’re working to prevent and end veteran homelessness – because in the United States of America, no one who served in our uniform should sleep on our streets.

We also know that for many of today’s troops and their families, the war doesn’t end when they come home.

Too many suffer from the signature injuries of today’s wars: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury. And too few receive the screening and treatment they need.

Now, in past wars, this wasn’t something America always talked about. And as a result, our troops and their families often felt stigmatized or embarrassed when it came to seeking help.

Today, we’ve made it clear up and down the chain of command that folks should seek help if they need it. In fact, we’ve expanded mental health counseling and services for our vets.

But for years, many veterans with PTSD who have tried to seek benefits – veterans of today’s wars and earlier wars – have often found themselves stymied. They’ve been required to produce evidence proving that a specific event caused their PTSD. And that practice has kept the vast majority of those with PTSD who served in non-combat roles, but who still waged war, from getting the care they need.

Well, I don’t think our troops on the battlefield should have to take notes to keep for a claims application. And I’ve met enough veterans to know that you don’t have to engage in a firefight to endure the trauma of war.

So we’re changing the way things are done.

On Monday, the Department of Veterans Affairs, led by Secretary Ric Shinseki, will begin making it easier for a veteran with PTSD to get the benefits he or she needs.

This is a long-overdue step that will help veterans not just of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars, but generations of their brave predecessors who proudly served and sacrificed in all our wars.

It’s a step that proves America will always be here for our veterans, just as they’ve been there for us. We won’t let them down. We take care of our own. And as long as I’m Commander-in-Chief, that’s what we’re going to keep doing. Thank you.

Jul 8, 2010

V.A. Is Easing Rules to Cover Stress Disorder

Rightwingers like American Enterprise Institute's (AEI) Dr. Sally Satel object, but things are getting a lot easier for veterans under the Obama administration.

For one thing the U.S. DoJ does not aggressively seek out veterans with PTSD and prosecute them.

Under the new rules, a Wisconsin resident, U.S. Navy Airman Keith Roberts (1968–71), who served almost four years in a federal prison for wire fraud, would never have been targeted by the national VA Director who pushed former U.S. Atty Stephen Biskupic to indict this innocent Wisconsin veteran for failing to document his disability clam made on the advice of his county veteran service officer.

Roberts' disability benefits case is now before the top administrative law court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, though in his bizarre political prosecution he was prosecuted before his benefits case had even reached the top appellate courts because he was a whistleblower on VA scandals and a major pain to the VA.

By James Dao in the NYT

The government is preparing to issue new rules that will make it substantially easier for veterans who have been found to have post-traumatic stress disorder to receive disability benefits, a change that could affect hundreds of thousands of veterans from the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam.

The regulations from the Department of Veterans Affairs, which will take effect as early as Monday and cost as much as $5 billion over several years according to Congressional analysts, will essentially eliminate a requirement that veterans document specific events like bomb blasts, firefights or mortar attacks that might have caused P.T.S.D., an illness characterized by emotional numbness, irritability and flashbacks.

For decades, veterans have complained that finding such records was extremely time consuming and sometimes impossible. And in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, veterans groups assert that the current rules discriminate against tens of thousands of service members — many of them women — who did not serve in combat roles but nevertheless suffered traumatic experiences.

Under the new rule, which applies to veterans of all wars, the department will grant compensation to those with P.T.S.D. if they can simply show that they served in a war zone and in a job consistent with the events that they say caused their conditions. They would not have to prove, for instance, that they came under fire, served in a front-line unit or saw a friend killed.

The new rule would also allow compensation for service members who had good reason to fear traumatic events, known as stressors, even if they did not actually experience them.

There are concerns that the change will open the door to a flood of fraudulent claims. But supporters of the rule say the veterans department will still review all claims and thus be able to weed out the baseless ones.

“This nation has a solemn obligation to the men and women who have honorably served this country and suffer from the emotional and often devastating hidden wounds of war,” the secretary of veterans affairs, Eric K. Shinseki, said in a statement to The New York Times. “This final regulation goes a long way to ensure that veterans receive the benefits and services they need.”

Though widely applauded by veterans’ groups, the new rule is generating criticism from some quarters because of its cost. Some mental health experts also believe it will lead to economic dependency among younger veterans whose conditions might be treatable.

Disability benefits include free physical and mental health care and monthly checks ranging from a few hundred dollars to more than $2,000, depending on the severity of the condition.

“I can’t imagine anyone more worthy of public largess than a veteran,” said Dr. Sally Satel, a psychiatrist and fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative policy group, who has written on P.T.S.D. “But as a clinician, it is destructive to give someone total and permanent disability when they are in fact capable of working, even if it is not at full capacity. A job is the most therapeutic thing there is.”

But Rick Weidman, executive director for policy and government affairs at Vietnam Veterans of America, said most veterans applied for disability not for the monthly checks but because they wanted access to free health care.

“I know guys who are rated 100 percent disabled who keep coming back for treatment not because they are worried about losing their compensation, but because they want their life back,” Mr. Weidman said.

Mr. Weidman and other veterans’ advocates said they were disappointed by one provision of the new rule: It will require a final determination on a veteran’s case to be made by a psychiatrist or psychologist who works for the veterans department.

The advocates assert that the rule will allow the department to sharply limit approvals. They argue that private physicians should be allowed to make those determinations as well.

But Tom Pamperin, associate deputy under secretary for policy and programs at the veterans department, said the agency wanted to ensure that standards were consistent for the assessments.

“V.A. and V.A.-contract clinicians go through a certification process,” Mr. Pamperin said. “They are well familiar with military life and can make an assessment of whether the stressor is consistent with the veterans’ duties and place of service.”

The new rule comes at a time when members of Congress and the veterans department itself are moving to expand health benefits and disability compensation for a variety of disorders linked to deployment. The projected costs of those actions are generating some opposition, though probably not enough to block any of the proposals.

The largest proposal would make it easier for Vietnam veterans with ischemic heart disease, Parkinson’s disease and hairy-cell leukemia to receive benefits.

The rule, proposed last fall by the veterans department, would presume those diseases were caused by exposure to Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant, if a veteran could simply demonstrate that he had set foot in Vietnam during the war.

The rule, still under review, is projected to cost more than $42 billion over a decade.

Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia and a Vietnam veteran, has asked that Congress review the proposal before it takes effect. “I take a back seat to no one in my concern for our veterans,” Mr. Webb said in a floor statement in May. “But I do think we need to have practical, proper procedures.”

More than two million service members have deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan since 2001, and by some estimates 20 percent or more of them will develop P.T.S.D.

More than 150,000 cases of P.T.S.D. have been diagnosed by the veterans health system among veterans of the two wars, while thousands more have received diagnoses from private doctors, said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, an advocacy group.

But Mr. Sullivan said records showed that the veterans department had approved P.T.S.D. disability claims for only 78,000 veterans. That suggests, he said, that many veterans with the disorder are having their compensation claims rejected by claims processors. “Those statistics show a very serious problem in how V.A. handles P.T.S.D. claims,” Mr. Sullivan said.

Representative John Hall, Democrat of New York and sponsor of legislation similar to the new rule, said his office had handled dozens of cases involving veterans who had trouble receiving disability compensation for P.T.S.D., including a Navy veteran from World War II who twice served on ships that sank in the Pacific.

“It doesn’t matter whether you are an infantryman or a cook or a truck driver,” Mr. Hall said. “Anyone is potentially at risk for post-traumatic stress.”

Jun 16, 2010

Is the Legion Getting It on Veterans' Benefits?

I seriously doubt the national American Legion gets much of anything about disability benefits and the claims process, [local posts do a lot of good work, it should be noted].

During decades of lies, unnecessary wars, shreddergate, betrayal and outright legal attack on our veterans, the American Legion as a national entity said: Not word one.

They were part of the problem, and it's no coincidence the Veterans Benefits Administration, embedded VA neocons and its allies prevailed in their objectives to delay, deny and hope you die; or at least go away and shut the hell up.

A loose coalition of veterans and advocates has moved in to push the Veterans Benefits Administration into some sort of action forward.

Ask a veteran how successful we have been because it's obvious we're not there yet.

The services provided by the VA are arguably as bad as ever; stupid wars tend to do that when combined with think tank-inspired imbecilities that veterans just have it too easy now-a-days.

But now the American Legion is beginning to sound vaguely like Veterans for Common Sense, Dan Cedusky's outfit, and activist veteran Mike Bailey, for example.

Here's their press release dated today. One prefers the language and slashing comments we get here from our readers, and it's obvious the Legion is getting their share of it from veterans and rightfully so.

For what it's worth, from the Legion:


American Legion Presses VBA to Improve Work Quality and Timeliness

WASHINGTON, June 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The American Legion told Congress yesterday that, while the Veterans Benefits Administration has made some recent progress, it believes "there are clearly areas for improvement" in the way VBA processes disability claims for veterans.
"VBA has, to be fair, made many strides forward in recent history, but there are still many areas that must be addressed," said Ian de Planque, deputy director of The American Legion's veterans affairs and rehabilitation division, in his written testimony before a House subcommittee. "VBA struggles with the quality of work and timeliness, not only in the adjudication of claims but also in the implementation of internal regulatory changes and those directed by Congress."

In addition, de Planque said, the accuracy of VBA's work is suffering from the pressures of moving a high volume of disability claims through its own system -- a system that has serious flaws, according to a March 2009 report from the Dept. of Veterans Affairs Office of the Inspector General.

The OIG report found that VBA has been remiss in reviewing and analyzing its own systemic problems: while 20 reviews were planned for the grant/denial rates for veterans' disability claims, only two were conducted. "Furthermore," the report said, "VBA officials did not initiate either of the two planned evaluation reviews to analyze and improve the consistency of disability compensation ratings, and to reduce the variances between states."

"VBA is not following up on their own projected plans for analysis," de Planque told the House Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs. "Regardless of the potential of STAR (Systematic Technical Accuracy Review, introduced in October 1998), if it is not implemented as intended, it cannot hope to be an effective tool for correction. The exertion of outside pressure would seem essential to enforcing the application of the procedures in place."

The American Legion has already proposed three changes that would improve STAR: develop a system to track errors nationwide, use the gathered data to improve training programs, and strengthen the program's effectiveness with independent oversight.

If VBA is, indeed, gathering information on its own errors, "it does not appear to be used in any fashion for analysis to detect trends which could indicate larger, systemic problems," de Planque told the subcommittee, chaired by Rep. John Hall, D-N.Y.

While the OIG report estimated that nearly one-fourth of all claims processed by VBA contained mistakes, de Planque said the error rate at VA regional offices "is even higher," at least among veterans' claims being filed through American Legion service officers.

"During quality-review visits conducted by The American Legion, which encompass a weeklong review of operations in Regional Offices, VBA's error rate often reaches a third of all claims evaluated," he said.

Recent legislation passed by Congress has directed VBA to use measures already in place to expedite the claims process, such as granting interim disability ratings until veterans can submit more supporting documentation. Also -- instead of denying a claim outright -- well-documented health issues can be granted immediately while others that need more data can be deferred for later decisions.

"VBA, however, has been slow in implementing these types of ratings," de Planque said. "All of the good intentions of VA and Congress to improve the system for veterans are for naught if the measures are not implemented."

In his testimony, de Planque highlighted two areas where veterans are still experiencing substantial delays in getting their claims processed: the confirmation of stressorsforpost-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and three new presumptive conditions related to the herbicide Agent Orange: ischemic heart disease, Parkinson's disease, and B-cell leukemia.

De Planque told the subcommittee The American Legion fields dozens of calls every day "from concerned veterans, asking what progress is being made on the final implementation" of VA regulations that must be in place before disability benefits can be awarded for the additional Agent Orange-related diseases.

While veterans qualify for back pay of benefits once VBA decides in their favor, de Planque reminded the subcommittee that veterans must also wait for the health care to treat their conditions.

"The effects of heart disease and Parkinson's, when untreated, can be devastating. VA must act to move forward on this and grant these deserving veterans their claims with all due haste so they can receive the preventive health care they are entitled to," de Planque said. "The time for delays has long since passed, and this must be a priority for resolution, with no more obstacles thrown in the way of these veterans."

But VBA is making some progress, de Planque said, noting that nearly 40 pilot programs are being conducted, most of them aimed at improving operations of the benefits system. American Legion officials have observed several of the programs and gave them positive evaluations, according to de Planque.

The American Legion testimony's main theme was that VBA needs to pay greater attention to detail in processing disability claims for veterans who have earned their benefits through honorable service in the military.

De Planque told the committee that "quick fixes" made by VBA in correcting its errors on claims "are fixes that not only save the veteran years of delays, they save [VBA] years of work. Get it done right the first time and there is no need to clog the system with second, third and fourth times."

SOURCE The American Legion

May 3, 2010

U.S. Troops Are Technically War Criminals, Fearing Hostile VA

by Michael Leon

Just off the phone with a veteran who told me U.S. soldiers and Marines often take pictures in war zones [such as they are] of enemy dead in violation of various articles of the Geneva Conventions. Guys figure they'll have an easier time with the VA if they have pictures of the dead (if they make it out) that they can file with VA documents.

Veterans' fathers, their grandfathers (and women too) know the story about the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA), a predatory and dysfunctional agency that denied their family's health and lives.

We hope it's changing, but the VA ain't your friend, especially if you're a Vietnam-era veteran:

But the DVA does have it share of defenders: The kindest thing these defenders are called by veterans are "chickenhawks," "house cats," and "pukes."

One of the DVA's friends is AP national writer, Allen Breed.

Breed defends the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and the U.S. Dept of Justice (DOJ) who went after Wisconsin Navy veteran Keith Roberts in 2004 for blowing the whistle on the DVA's shredder-gate scandal in the most undiplomatic way possible: Repeated obscenities.

I broke the story on Roberts on few years' back; but Roberts is the tip of the iceberg of systemic mistreatment of our veterans.

Readers have seen saturation coverage of the deficiencies and hostilities of the DVA and embedded neocons in these pages.

Reviewing Allen Breed's national AP hit job on U. S. veterans and reformist elements at the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA), there is a danger in writing a follow-up piece asking for comment from veterans.

Namely, Breed's assertions that disability claims are being handled too "quickly, humanely, and mostly in the vets' favor" present a risk that veterans may just stroke out in righteous anger when asked their opinion of these statements. I don't want cause an activist veteran his or her life. Not kidding.

As axiomatic to veterans as the oath they swore to defend the U.S. Constitution is the reality that a veteran filing a disability benefit claim encounters the VA's 'deny-delay-and-hope-you-die' culture.

How bad is the disability claim process?

The long document that a claimant must fill out [over one-million claims were filed in 2009, predicted to grow by the 100,000s] will more than likely be denied or delayed by a some claims specialist at the Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA), like Mark Rogers quoted by writer Breed.

Rogers makes the absurd statement, unchallenged by any source Breed presents, that all a veteran has to do is "lie" and they can easily obtain "100 percent disability compensation."

Breed's editor has a nice shot of the VBA bureaucrat, posing before the camera like he's actually proud of the mess he's makes veterans slog through.

As Mike Bailey writes over at Kos, "I have spent years advocating for veterans and their families. I am used to the major news agencies that report just facts and leave opinion pieces to others to write, Reuters, AP even Bloomberg News, but this [Breed's] is the most opinionated piece I have ever seen from the AP."

For a benefits process that hums along so "quickly [and] humanely," there sure seems like a lot of suicides; see the Unseen Enemy: Corps had military’s highest rate in 2009.

Speaking of unseen enemies, they're not just embedded bureaucrats at the VBA, or pencil-necks at the the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the enemy of the veteran is in the press as well.

Writes Breed, "No one knows the full extent of PTSD fraud. But there have been some hints."

Here's a hint for you, Breed: Our sworn veterans deserve the benefit of the doubt and one hell of a lot more than that.

May 1, 2010

AP: VA Makes It's too Easy for Veterans to File Claims ... Seriously

By Michael Leon

Updated - As PTSD claims soar, the systemic problem at the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is the ease with which veterans file for disability benefit claims, in the view of Allen Breed, a national writer for the Associated Press.

This is a hit job on veterans and the progress being contemplated by some at the DVA (VA) to help veterans.

Do you have that? Things are too easy for veterans dealing with the VA now, asserts the AP's Breed.
Moved by a huge tide of troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with post-traumatic stress, Congress has pressured the Department of Veterans Affairs to settle their disability claims — quickly, humanely, and mostly in the vets' favor.
Continues Breed in his piece, PTSD cases rise and rules for claims ease, VA warned that more frauds will slip through: "The problem: The system is dysfunctional, an open invitation to fraud. And the VA has proposed changes that could make deception even easier."

That's the issue and it's political.

No deny-delay-and-hope-you-die culture at the DVA, just too many veterans taking advantage of "profitably working the levers of sympathy for the wounded and obligation to the troops, and exploiting the sheer difficulty of nailing a surefire diagnosis of a condition that is notoriously hard to define."

No years waiting on a claim, it's the ease with which veterans navigate the system now that is the real issue.

This is just crazy.

Stated Atty Robert Walsh at oral arguments in a federal criminal case cooked up by the VA and DOJ in October 2007 against a Navy veteran:

... (I)t's a total distortion in this record, and any suggestion that any veteran can just walk into the V.A., file a claim and say, you know, a peace time Veteran, that I was here in the states and I was sexually assaulted, and it's stressful, give me money. And the (VA’s) answer is, did you tell the chaplain, did you go to the hospital, did you confide in a family member, do you have a contemporaneous letter, do you have documentation? ‘No, I was embarrassed’. Then the claim fails. Your own statement, no matter how compelling the argument, how tragic the circumstances, is not going to be the basis of an award of PTSD.
Breed disagrees.

No "system stack[ed] deck against injured soldiers by forcing them to prove they have post-traumatic stress disorder [PTST,’ (Marine Corp Times (Kelly Kennedy, April 5, 2007)).

PTSD

The only reason that PTSD is "hard to define" is the DVA's contrived definition and the VA's systemic barriers to proving its existence in our veterans.

This is axiomatic to any veteran's advocate, but evidently eludes Breed. He did not talk to Paul Sullivan at Veterans for Common Sense or any other veteran in these pages who could have set him straight.

Let's get back to Wisconsin Navy veteran Keith Roberts (covered in these pages) targeted by the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (VA) in 2003-05, who became the central figure in an Alice-in-Wonderland tale, after U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic of Wisconsin and top VA officials schemed to convict Roberts’ of fraudulently receiving VA benefits (by wire transfer as the VA requires).

Breed quotes the prosecution approvingly, taking the VA's and CAVC's (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) positions at face value as though these institution have a shred of credibility.

The basis of the prosecution: Holland and Roberts were not friends (an assertion knocked down) it was divined after 35 years by VA cops, after the death of Roberts' friend and fellow airman.

The VA cop. Raymond Vasil of a VA regional Inspector General's office. found that Navy veterans could not recall the presence of a given person 35 years later as another man lay being slowly crushed to death. No kidding.

Navy veteran Keith Roberts filed a claim, several claims as he learned how, and then listened to his veteran service officer and asked for retroactive awarding of his benefits to his discharge.

Roberts often screamed at the Milwaukee VA regional office that they were illegally altering his C-File, his claims file. He was right. But they turned around and charged him with fraud.

The case had drew the attention of Harper's magazine contributor and human rights attorney, Scott Horton, after the U.S. Attorneys' scandal broke during the Bush administration:

(T)ake a look at another prosecution brought in Wisconsin against a wounded vet, whose claims for benefits was turned into a criminal prosecution for wire fraud. As Wisconsin Public Radio reports,Keith Roberts, a Navy veteran got into the U.S. attorney’s crosshairs by filing a claim for benefits related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) diagnosed as occurring because he witnessed and tried to prevent his friend from being crushed to death by a C-54 airplane while stationed at a Naval air base in Naples, Italy 1969, and unrelated assault by the Navy Shore Patrol—granted and then denied, has not yet been decided by the CAVC. But the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) after being accused of fraud in 2003 by Roberts ignored the CAVC process and investigated and asked that Roberts be prosecuted for fraud by the US Attorney’s office.

The prosecution smacks of retaliation and a plan to suppress veterans claims—Roberts was prosecuted for tenaciously pursuing a claim for benefits, which VA resisted and which is still in the benefits review process. It may be that the veteran is making claims which shouldn't be granted, but the decision to resist them by a criminal complaint is very heavy handed. What happens if the Veterans’ Appeals process rules for Roberts? As I read these papers, that seems possible. ...
Who knows? Roberts's case now is being appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and we can expect a decision in a few years.

In reading Breed's piece, a rare national piece on the processes at the VA, I cannot for the life of me believe he reports that VA Secretary Eric K. Shinseki is making things too easy by proposing new rules.

Breed cites the Board of Veterans Appeals and CAVC on decisions made against veterans without comment and context.

This is like asking Karl Rove for his objective opinion of President Obama's performance. Did Breed talk to any member of the CAVC bar board off-the-record on the opinion?

And of course, Breed essentially takes the position of the chickenhawks at the American Enterprise Institute's (AEI) like Dr. Sally Satel who ridicules veterans diagnosed with PTSD, a view that has permeated the Dept of Veterans Affairs, though the proposed changes are bemoaned by Breed's sources.

See the Post: "Psychiatrist Sally Satel, who is affiliated with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said an underground network advises veterans where to go for the best chance of being declared disabled. The institute organized a recent meeting to discuss PTSD among veterans."

Don't you think it's odd that VA investigators ordered by top VA officials pulled this prosecution?

Why not mention the political environment?

Roberts was targeted by the US Dept of Veterans Affairs (VA) in 2003-05, and became the central figure in this Alice-in-Wonderland tale, after U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic of Wisconsin and top VA officials schemed to convict Roberts’ of fraudulently receiving VA benefits (by wire transfer as the VA requires).

Veterans’ advocates know well Roberts is a victim of a vigorous attempt to marginalize, investigate, and prosecute veterans receiving disability benefits in an aborted attempt to fabricate a fraud crisis among veterans who were injured and traumatized during their service to their country.

As the Iraq and Afghanistan wars produce 100,000s more wounded veterans—a phenomenon that is was the subject of an unprecedented class action law suit by veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan against the VA [dismissed but its allegations found as fact}—advocates allege that Roberts’ extraordinary prosecution was part of the Bush administration’s priorities to discourage VA disability benefits claims, especially among Vietnam-era veterans, serving to carry out the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)/Bush policy that demeans veterans for seeking help with PTSD in what the AEI derisively brands a “culture of trauma.”

The Pentagon has gone so far as to blame veterans “personality disorders” and lack of faith in God for veterans suffering after service. [A VA May 1, 2008 e-mail obtained via FOIA request reveals, that because of “compensation seeking veterans,” VA staff should “refrain from giving a diagnosis of PTSD straight out” and they should “R/O [rule out] PTSD” and consider a diagnosis of “Adjustment Disorder” instead.

One administration initiative to investigate 72,000 cases of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was halted in 2005 after a storm of outrage from veterans’ groups and Democrats, including the then Senator Obama.

Here's how Breed concludes his piece without casting a single doubt on the Roberts prosecution, ignoring why he was a political target, or even quoting a knockdown from one source on his thesis that the VA is taking it too easy on veterans now-a-days:

But investigators later determined that Roberts didn't even participate in the rescue effort and was not as close to Holland as he'd claimed. The Board of Veterans Appeals said the VA's regional office "simply conceded" Roberts' claims "without obtaining credible supporting evidence."

After losing his benefits, Roberts was convicted of wire fraud, sentenced to 48 months in prison and ordered to pay $262,943.52 in restitution. Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims concluded in a 45-page ruling that Roberts "committed fraud in securing VA benefits for his PTSD" and affirmed the BVA's decision to sever them.

In a recent telephone interview, the 62-year-old veteran denied that he lied, but argued that under VA rules, he could have PTSD from merely being "vicariously aware of the situation."

When asked whether the new rule would throw open the doors to more fraud, Shinseki stressed the need for more research into PTSD and traumatic brain injury, the war on terror's other "signature" wound.

"I know if we take your temperature and you're registering at 102 degrees, you've got a fever, and there are ways to cope with that," the VA secretary told the AP. "PTSD and TBI are in need of the same kind of metrics."
___

AP Writer Kimberly Hefling in Washington, D.C., also contributed to this report. Allen G. Breed, a national writer for The Associated Press based in Raleigh, N.C., can be reached at features@ap.org.

Actually, investigators never proved a thing. But after 35 years, Roberts couldn't prove anything either, so he must be a criminal, the IG and DoJ reasoned.

It turns out, the federal government can make a jury in northern Wisconsin believe just about anything.

- elements of this story were previously published -

Nov 22, 2008

We Need Obama on Veterans

Here's hoping the new administration will address the plight of veterans and our collective negligence in looking after them through the malfunctioning U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (VA).

An overhaul of the VA needs to be near the top of the long list of things to fix fast by president-elect Obama.

From Bob Herbert:

With so much attention understandably focused on the economy and the incoming administration, the struggles being faced by G.I.’s coming home from combat overseas are receding even further from the public’s consciousness.

If you’re in your late teens or early 20s and your energies have been directed for a year or more toward dodging roadside bombs and ambushes, caring for horribly wounded comrades and, in general, killing before being killed, it can be difficult to readjust to a world of shopping malls, speed limits and polite conversation.

Nov 10, 2008

Respecting Veterans More than a Car Sticker

Tuesday, November 11 is Veterans Day.

But the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA), charged with providing patient care and delivering veterans' benefits, has become a malfunctioning governmental agency.

Worse, the VA has become—through its policy of knocking down large financial rewards for injured veterans—a rogue agency illegally inventing a "review scheme (that) is punitive, discriminatory, confiscatory and contrary to the veterans' benefits system established by Congress," and literally shredding the service records of our veterans.

And even worse, it has jailed an honorably discharged and innocent Wisconsin Navy veteran through the tender hands of U.S. Atty Stephen Biskupic, infamous for the the proven-innocent Georgia Thompson prosecution and pursuit of Wisconsin voters.

Many look to President-elect Obama to make things right.

Roberts was convicted of five counts of wire fraud for receiving VA disability funds stemming from his diagnosed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) related to a Navy friend, Gary Holland, being crushed to death during the Vietnam War combat era.

U.S. Atty Biskupic's office had convinced a jury that Roberts and the deceased Navy airman (Holland) did not have a friendship and that Roberts, who was on line duty at a Naval base in Naples, Italy on February 5, 1969 at the time that Holland was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft, exaggerated his efforts to save Holland, which constituted fraud for which Roberts was convicted in November 2006 by a jury in northern Wisconsin.

Roberts has been serving a four-year sentence since March 2007.

The prosecution and conviction remain at best highly controversial and a three-member panel for the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in July found that, "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 ... (but) (i)t is beyond our authority to disturb (a guilty) finding on appeal (in this case)."

Indeed the two men had parallel careers at several military bases that would make highly unlikely that Holland and Roberts were not at least friendly, though not friendly enough for the VA and the US DoJ that pursued the case over two years.

The hurdle for an appellate court to overturn the judgement of a jury is high, but the criminal case remains under appeal and the benefits case was recently argued at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC), (Roberts v. Secretary of the VA (05-2425)).

Roberts awaits a decision on both cases at he continues serving a four-year sentence for serving his country.

Those wishing to write Roberts can reach him at:

Keith Roberts, 07827-089
FCI Englewood,
East-Upper FCI 9595
West Quincy Avenue
Littleton, CO 80123