Last year, a group of federal scientists was debating whether as many
as 2,100 Air Force veterans should qualify for cash benefits for
ailments they claimed stemmed from flying aircraft contaminated by Agent
Orange.
An outside panel of experts had already determined that the scientific evidence showed the vets were likely exposed to the toxic herbicide.
The
scientists within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs agreed the
airmen had a strong case. But they had a more calculated concern: If the
VA doled out cash to these veterans, others might want it too,
according to an internal document obtained by The Virginian-Pilot and ProPublica.
The
group put their worries in writing. In a draft memo, they warned the
secretary of Veterans Affairs that giving benefits to the airmen might
prompt “additional pressure” from other veteran groups.
Such
political and financial concerns aren’t supposed to play into decisions
about Agent Orange benefits, veterans advocates and some legal experts
say. Federal law requires that, in most cases, these decisions be guided
strictly by science.
But an examination of two recent cases
illustrates how dueling considerations of liability, responsibility and
evolving scientific evidence weigh into VA deliberations.
“This
shows what we’ve already suspected: At the VA, they’re more interested
in politics, and protecting their turf and their bonuses, than
fulfilling their mission to assist veterans,” said John Wells, a
Louisiana lawyer who has spent more than a decade advocating for 90,000
Navy vets fighting for Agent Orange benefits.
VA officials say
they are committed to making sure qualified vets get benefits, and they
believe the law allows them to consider the ramifications of their
decisions when weighing the eligibility of new groups.
“Considering
second order effects of a decision does not in any way violate the
Agent Orange Act,” the VA’s general counsel’s office wrote in response
to questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment