skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Anthony Principi: Wounded Vets Deserve Better
"To care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan."
Abraham Lincoln's words light the path of America's eternal
responsibility to those who have served in uniform. But we have lost our
focus on Lincoln's command: Veterans and their families wait far too
long for the benefits they have earned. Too often, this is because those
who have been injured in military service—including our most recent
vets—must wait in line with those who served but were not wounded.
On Aug. 22, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki said that the
department has reduced a backlog of disability claims by 20% to some
773,000 cases, including about 480,000 that have been pending for more
than 125 days. Yet no number of new claims processors will be skilled
enough, no computer fast enough or shortcut quick enough to deal with
the ever-rising tide of claims unless the VA refocuses on the kind of
care the system was designed to deliver. The enumeration of benefits has
evolved far beyond the nation's obligation to those who became ill or
injured while in service. It is time to return to original principles.
Twelve years ago, America went to war. Since then, about 6,000
service members have been killed in action and some 50,000 wounded.
Their claims for disability compensation are not choking the Veterans
Affairs benefits system. They are the victims of the sclerosis now
overwhelming the veterans-benefits program—a system that often puts the
most needy in line behind everyone else.
Every year more than a million veterans file claims for
"service-connected" disability compensation; that is, for any disability
or disease arising while on active duty, regardless of how the
disability or disease was incurred. Nearly 80% of those claims are from
veterans whose service predates Sept. 11, 2001. According to the
Department of Veterans Affairs website, 37% are filed by my fellow
Vietnam War veterans. More than 100,000 claims were filed last year by
veterans who served during peacetime.
The price for allowing veterans to
file claims throughout their lives is paid by the veteran who has lost a
leg to a land mine in Afghanistan; whose ability to think clearly was
clouded by the explosion of an improvised explosive device in Iraq; or
by the grieving widow of a newly deceased young corporal. Every claim
for compensation must fend for itself in a bureaucracy for which every
veteran is the first priority—which means, of course, that no veteran is
the first priority.
When everyone applies for disability compensation, those who embody
the reason that Veterans Affairs exists must lose out. Their claims are
one more folder in an ever-higher pile. Restoring Lincoln's focus will
require rethinking what VA benefits are intended to achieve. Benefits
and services should respond to disabilities incurred by veterans while
in service, especially disabilities incurred in combat or while training
for combat.
This is not always the case today. One
example: A Vietnam veteran need provide no evidence beyond a discharge
showing in-country service and a diagnosis for diseases presumed to be
the result of exposure to Agent Orange to get automatic
service-connection. That presumption is based on tenuous medical science
described by the Institute of Medicine as only "weak" or "suggestive."
Today, veterans who spent just one day in Vietnam are automatically
service-connected for Type II diabetes (irrespective of other lifestyle
or heredity factors); Parkinson's disease; prostate cancer; lung cancer
(irrespective of smoking history) and ischemic heart disease. All of
these are among the most common diseases of older men, veteran or
non-veteran. Veterans Affairs examines veterans not just for the primary
disease they may have, but also for conditions that may flow from it.
Because these diseases get worse as veterans age, they have every
incentive to regularly reopen their claims.
As a Vietnam veteran, I will be able to file a claim if I get sick at
age 92, or 102. If any of those diseases contributes to my death, my
widow will get the same compensation as the spouse of a service member
killed in Afghanistan. My widow's claim will contribute to the pile of
claims that must be processed along with the Afghanistan spouse's claim.
As the Republican chief counsel to the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, and later as George W. Bush's
secretary of Veterans Affairs, I was part of the process that created
these presumptions. I make no apology for my actions. But our obligation
to future veterans calls for refocusing the benefits we provide. Clear
thinking can restore balance to the system while retaining its fairness.
Shouldn't there be a cutoff date—either in age or years since service
in Vietnam—for disabilities that may be related to Agent Orange? At
some point, the system now goes far beyond what the law
requires—resolving reasonable doubt about the degree of disability in
favor of the veteran, after careful consideration of all available
data—as Veterans Affairs is required to do. This makes no sense when
older veterans are compensated for the expected and ordinary effects of
aging.
Another source of claims crowding the line for VA benefits is the
concept of "individual unemployability." Veterans Affairs can pay
disability compensation at a 100% rate to veterans with lesser
disabilities—evaluated as little as 60% disabled—if their disability
prevents them from working. That makes sense for working-age veterans.
But does it make sense when a veteran files his first claim when he is
80 or 90 years old?
Veterans Affairs is compelled to devote the same resources to
deciding these claims as it does to the claims of veterans just back
from Afghanistan. And these older veterans receive 100% disability
compensation—as retirees, in effect—while Afghanistan veterans with
below-the-knee amputations get only 40% (the degree to which the VA
believes such an impairment affects a veteran's ability to work). That's
just wrong.
Some have called for Secretary Shinseki's resignation. I do not.
Instead, Washington—from Congress to the Pentagon—must reassess what
laws, regulations and rules can be changed to ensure that benefits and
other decisions Veterans Affairs makes are beyond reproach and based on
the best facts available.
Let's ensure that the department's limited resources are focused on
its core mission rather than dispersed in an effort to remedy every
possible problem for every veteran. Remember, when everyone is first
priority, no one is.
No comments:
Post a Comment