US Gov't-run healthcare failures uncovered!

Finally it is being proven that this is the culture and when I was volunteering at the VA in Ann Arbor this was the norm and not the exception.

I believe the Dept of Veterans Affairs needs to be completely dismantled. A completely new entity needs to be constructed as the current one is so badly broken it is beyond repair.

The bills that have been offered to fix the problem either do not address the causal factors of the problem or are so badly watered down that it would have little to no impact.

This is not the fault of the President. This is not the fault of Congress. This is not the fault of Democrats or Republicans. It is the fault of unhindered bureaucracy.

This is why I will never have faith in the national gov't of the US in effectively running healthcare. I think states and localities could do a much better job. In the national gov't it is too easy for corruption to take hold and whistleblowers have too little of affect, highlighted by this example.

Note: Because of my advanced service I will not rely on the VA for medical treatment. In 2 1/2 years I will be eligible for Tricare 4 Life thus exempting me from relying upon the VA (assuming no misconduct disqualifying me on my part). So this is an issue I won't have to deal with. Members of my family may after my death (that's when the VA would handle my survivor benefits). So my stake in this is very little and almost nil while I am still alive.

No votes yet

Don't want to hear it, you're the one who is against any more funding for veterans. Go post your hypocrisy elsewhere.

I am against stupid funding for veterans.

Yoga classes and weight loss support groups do not solve the problems the VA has. Apparently you think it does.


I'd seriously consider any proposal to privatize the VA system. Why can't VA benefits simply be transferred into a Medicare-like system?

There are challenges with that. I'm not saying it can't be done but it would take years.

The VA employs tens of thousands and not just in their hospitals. Those jobs would all need to be transferred.

Also, the VA doesn't operate like how a normal health insurance company does. They don't provide comprehensive coverage unless you're deemed disabled. If one is not deemed disabled or disabled enough they only receive treatment for those injuries incurred during service. Anything before or after is not covered. They also provide services for veterans that are not covered by normal insurance companies.


"[T]he VA doesn't operate like how a normal health insurance company does."

So? The procedures for collecting from each individual insurer today are different enough. A vet would simply come along with VAcare or something like that, with its own specifications. Big deal. That's what hospital administrators and clerks are for, yes?

Bush Administration and Walter Reed.

Sorry, this is now no longer a partisan issue. Please shut your pie holes about Obama.

Did the administration do something about it? If I recall the Bush administration immediately replaced the Walter Reed Commanding Officer when they found out.

The VA has been plagued with problems for years. Shinseki was supposed to fix it. A story on his nomination. What it states: "And that gets to one of the biggest problems that veterans have to wait too long when they apply for disability benefits. About one in five wait six months or more - sometimes a lot more - to find out if they get approved for a monthly disability check. The VA's been adding staff to try to cut that backlog, but some staff have been caught by the VA's own investigators of trying to reduce their own backlogs by shredding documents or backdating paperwork. And then there's another problem, and that's achieving something that the Pentagon and the VA call seamless transition. That's the idea of getting a soldier who leaves a military medical system into a VA doctor right away. And too often that doesn't work very well. "

Five years later the backlog is still there.


I can't get over the fact that congress after congress tends to fund the active military well. Often a congress has passed MORE funding than the funds requested by the Secretary of Defense. Yet these same members of congress do too little to help those veterans who are suffering, often with problems stemming from doing their duty for our country. I don't care which political party one favors, this is just plain wrong on so many levels.

On the other hand, I have to state that my father, a WWII vet, when in his declining years, was treated very well by the local VA. I took him to some of his appointments. The only complaint he had was that they would not give him every single drug he was prescribed by his doctors. But, he got a LOT of drugs and good medical treatment through the VA here.

Maybe if we took all that money funding shit the Pentagon doesn't want, doesn't need, and that merely serves as SOCIALISM-at-one-remove (keeping the constituency employed making unneeded, unwanted stuff for the military-industrial complex), and put that towards the VA, the problems would get fixed.

Your Obama said that he would make changes to the VA in 2009, in his speech at the same VA agency that this has happened to, among other states. Obama has done nothing since then. Don't give me that Bush shit. Obama is 100 times worse than Bush.

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

Dale and AC,

This is not a funding problem. It is a bookkeeping and technological problem.

The VA has failed to create an electronic database and most of what they use is a hybrid of early 90's technology and paper bookkeeping. It's lack of tranparency lends itself to ineffeciency and corruption as we are seeing. Gov't healthcare will always be rationed and thus "underfunded" that is why so many of us have a problem with the federal gov't running healthcare.

AC, I'll agree that we should cut the waste you are offering up if you agree that NPR/PBS are equally unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted and thus should be cut with the money going to the VA. If you want to cut what's unneeded, unwanted and unnecessary we can start with whole departments like the Dept of Education.


In other words, you're saying fuck everyone else including the corpse of Mr. Rogers and the social safety net for everyone else so the safety net for veterans stays intact.

How nice of you.

The "Compassionate Conservatism" of the GOP, ladies and gentlemen.

This is the first time I heard PBS referred to as a social safety net. That's funny. Mr. Rogers would have been successful on any other network that doesn't take taxpayer money. I can hear the stories you'll tell your grandchildren. "So there I was. Broke and unable to pay my cable bill. I was going to lose my mind but then... there it was... Curious George the animated cartoon! I tell you it saved my life!:

If you reread my post I am not forsaking everyone else for veterans. You made this a money issue and I clearly stated it was not. Throwing money at the VA has only succeeded in throwing money away.

What I'm advocating is ending the system. Starting from scratch and build a system with a solid foundation instead of constantly plugging leaks while you watch the crack widen.


Also, yeah, how much money goes to NPR and PBS? Let's see, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting got $445 million.

That is approximately how much Congress appropriated in the past 2 years to build tanks the Army told Congress they don't need down in Lima. $445 million of government handouts/pork and SOCIALISM AT ONE REMOVE. And that's just ONE instance.

"Specifically, the committee’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2015, as it’s officially known, would add funding to the Pentagon’s budget request for numerous equipment items.

Among the additions, known as “plus-ups” in congressional parlance: $450 million for five EA-18G Growler jets made by Boeing Co.; $782 million for the refueling of the Navy’s USS George Washington aircraft carrier, including $484 million for the refueling and complex overhaul, RCOH, and $298 million for reactor power units; and $82 million for more Tomahawk cruise missiles made by Raytheon Co., among many others, according to a report accompanying the legislation.

The House panel — against the wishes of its chairman and ranking member — voted to keep the A-10 in the Air Force fleet by using some $635 million in funding from the war budget, known as overseas contingency operations, or OCO, in a particularly obvious example of budget chicanery, Adams said." --

Of course, you want to stay employed by the government like any other hypocritical Republican, so you're not going to say a word about these programs and the fact that they're not needed.

I'd rather have Big Bird and NOVA than jets and tanks and ships the JCS neither need nor want yet have to employ you to wash every day. Big Bird and NOVA serve more purpose to more people daily and it's time for you to get a real job in the private sector just like you whine at all the supposed "welfare queens" to do.


AC apparently you think I'm a proponent of spending money the Pentagon doesn't want spent. You couldn't be further from the truth.

You are literally yelling at a mirror shouting "I'm not stupid you are!"


outdated, duplicative, and unnecessary in 2014. If PBS/NPR are well watched and/or listened to, they will generate enough revenues via advertising.
There was a time when PBS/NPR was "the only game in town" for those who wanted alternatives to the mostly awful children's programs available even when my own children were young. That's simply not true today. When my grandchildren are over, the little TV we watch is mostly Sprout Network. I made a list of all of the cable networks with a lot to almost all children's programing a couple of years ago. I have 9 such channels on my list.
And as far as adult programing, come on! We have so many, many options. PBS/NPR already gets significant revenues from commercial ads. I can't imagine that they will fold up without government funding.
Sorry that I didn't give you a typical, kneejerk liberal reaction, Mikey.

Not everyone can afford cable. So where does that put people with rabbit ears? Or should welfare recipients also be able to afford cable TV?

You believe that the end of government funding will be the end of PBS/NPR. Do you ever watch PBS or listen to NPR? Do you ever see or hear all of the commercials? Do you not believe that PBS/NPR could get enough sponsors to pay for their continuing programs?

You can argue just to try to win an argument, or you can be realistic. Realistically, in the near future, PBS/NPR are not going anywhere with or without public funding.

Moving money around isn't an answer. The federal government borrows 25% or more of each year's spending budget. We're broke. So these conversations about which special interest trumps another, is just re-arranging the deck chairs while they slide down the increasing slope of the HMS Titanic's deck.

No evidence.
No credentials.
Nothing but vacuous opinion -- and so bitter and negative at that!

Glad you're back to the doom and gloom. Keep bloviating!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.