|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Walter Reed scandal lifts lid on neglect of wounded US troops
By Barry Grey in Washington DC
10 March 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The past week has seen a flurry of congressional hearings,
the appointment of review boards and commissions, and the firing
of two high-level Pentagon officialsall in response to a
series of articles published last month by the Washington Post
documenting the neglect and mistreatment of wounded veterans
at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington DC.
The articles exposed the squalid living conditions and bureaucratic
indifference that outpatient soldiers, returned from Iraq and
Afghanistan with serious physical and mental injuries, have been
forced to endure at the most prestigious military medical facility
in the country.
Soldiers suffering from traumatic brain injuries or stress
disorders, others with amputated limbs, have languished for weeks
and months on end in vermin-infested quarters waiting for a decision
on their military status and a ruling on the level of benefits
they will receive if they are discharged and transferred to the
civilian-run Veterans Administration (VA) healthcare system.
Professions of shock and outrage have come from every quarter
of official Washington. President Bush and Vice President Cheney
have each issued public statements and Bush appointed a bipartisan
commission to report back in June on the treatment of wounded
troops at both military and VA facilities. He also named Veterans
Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson to head an inter-agency task force.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates appointed his own review board
following the firing of the military commander at Walter Reed
and the forced resignation of the secretary of the army.

Congressional Republicans have vied with Democrats in decrying
the conditions at Walter Reed and other medical facilities for
veterans at multiple hearings throughout the week.
That conditions such as those at Walter Reed exist at other
military hospitals, and that many disabled veterans get inadequate
care and face long, bureaucratic delays in the VA system, are
not revelations to US civilian and military policymakers. Such
conditions are the end result of inadequate funding and staffing,
for which Congress and the White House are both responsible. There
have, moreover, been published reports on substandard care and
bureaucratic logjams at Walter Reed, Fort Stewart in Georgia and
other Department of Defense facilities for years, and government
audits have pointed to pervasive problems in the provision of
medical care to wounded soldiers.
The appearance of the Washington Post series in the
first place is a reflection of the immense growth of antiwar sentiment
among the American people as a whole, and its mounting expression
among soldiers, veterans and their families. The Post reported
March 5 that hundreds of soldiers at military medical holding
units around the country had contacted the newspaper to report
conditions similar to those exposed at Walter Reed, and that thousands
of emails and phone calls had been received from veterans complaining
of substandard care at VA hospitals.
The feverish response by the White House, the Pentagon and
Congress is an attempt to contain this escalating popular opposition
and head off a collapse of morale throughout the military. The
exposure of official indifference to the plight of injured soldiers
is particularly damaging since it undercuts the attempt to portray
renewed funding for the war as being motivated by a commitment
to support the troops.
The mistreatment of wounded soldiers is one more demonstration
of the utter indifference, incompetence and contempt of the US
ruling elite and its two political parties for the American people.
The vast majority of soldiers are recruited from the working
class, largely from more oppressed and impoverished layers. The
systemic disregard for the needs of injured soldiers is another
expression of the same class divide that was exposed before the
eyes of the world in the Katrina disaster.
That divide runs right through the military. As Washington
Post writer Henry Allen pointed out in an unusually frank
column published on Friday, A little more than 80 percent
of the military is enlisted.... The officers wear the white collars,
the enlisted wear the blue. The two classes live on different
sides of the tracks...
Segregation is everywhere: bathrooms, dining rooms, social
clubs, sleeping quarters. When youre enlisted, you accept
these inequalities. They make sense. You have no choice. But you
cant ignore the ugly, feudal arrogance that they foster.
Wounded soldiers and veterans are the victims of a social and
political system whose priorities are determined by the narrow
self-interest of a financial aristocracy. Hundreds of billions
are handed out in tax cuts to the rich, billions more are funneled
to corporate cronies of the Bush administration in the form of
reconstruction contracts in Iraq, but there is no
money to properly fund medical care for the people, either military
or civilian.
Longstanding problems in healthcare for soldiers and veterans
were vastly compounded by the recklessness and lack of planning
that have marked every aspect of the US military adventure in
Iraq. There were no serious provisions for a major increase in
the number of patients entering the Defense Department and VA
medical systems. After all, according to those who conspired to
launch the warBush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitzthe
conflict would be over in six months.
But more than five years of war in Afghanistan and nearly four
in Iraq have killed nearly 3,600 American soldiers and flooded
military and VA hospitals with tens of thousands of wounded, overwhelming
an already overtaxed system.
This has not prevented the Bush administration and Congress
from continuing a policy of cost-cutting and privatization. In
testimony Wednesday before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee
on defense, the surgeon general of the Navy, Vice Admiral Donald
C. Arthur, noted that The presidents budget for fiscal
year 2008 ... authorizes 1,011 military to civilian conversions
... and assumes savings and efficiencies in several areas.
He described critical staffing shortages in the Navys
medical system: Our losses have outpaced gains over the
past several years and fiscal year 2006 was no exception, ending
the year with a 93.5 percent manning across the Navy Medical Department...
As of December 2006, the Medical Corps remained below
end-strength targets and continues to experience acute shortages
in critical wartime subspecialties... Last year the Medical Service
Corps fell short of their direct accession goal by over 30 percent
for the second year in a row, directly impacting our ability to
meet current mission requirements.
The ranking Republican on the subcommittee, Senator Ted Stevens
of Alaska, said cuts in medical programs for all military branches
would reach $500 million this year and $800 million next year.
Here are some indices of the state of the military and VA medical
systems:
* Disability claims with the VA increased by 39 percent from
2000 to 2006. The staffing for handling such claims has remained
essentially unchanged. The VA has a backlog of 400,000 benefit
claims.
* The VA depends on paper files and lacks the ability to download
Defense Department records onto its computers.
* Some 263,257 veterans were denied enrollment in VA health
coverage in 2005. Two months prior to the invasion of Iraq, the
Veterans Health Administration, which previously offered care
to all veterans, imposed restrictions on those entitled to enroll
in its healthcare system.
* In its Pentagon appropriations bill for 2007, Congress cut
in half the financing for the Armys main research and treatment
program on brain injury, which is housed at Walter Reed.
In the midst of this growing healthcare crisis, with two wars
under way, the government decided in 2005 to close down the Walter
Reed Army Medical Center by 2011 and merge its services with those
at the National Naval Medical Center in nearby Bethesda, Maryland.
This decision undoubtedly contributed to the deterioration of
services at the facility.
An even greater blow was the decision taken in 2006 to contract
out support services at Walter Reed to a private company with
close ties to the Bush administration. The Army handed a $120
million contract to IAP Worldwide Services, a Cape Canaveral,
Florida firm run by a former top executive at Halliburton, the
energy giant headed by Dick Cheney prior to his becoming vice
president. In handing the business to IAP, the Army reversed the
results of an audit which had concluded the existing government
employees could do the job more cheaply.
The government employees left in droves, knowing they would
be fired when IAPs contract took effect in February of this
year. By the time the company took over operations, the support
staff had fallen from more than 300 to less than 60. IAP fired
the remaining federal workers and hired only 50 private employees
to replace them.
Last week, the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform released an internal hospital memo written last September
by Walter Reeds garrison commander, Col. Peter Garibaldi,
warning that the decision to privatize support services was causing
an outflow of experienced personnel and putting patient care at
risk of mission failure.
See Also:
Democrats withdrawal plan
paves way to escalation of Iraq war
[9 March 2007]
Wall Street drools over prospect of capturing
Iraq oil wealth
[6 March 2007]
Army Secretary resigns, soldiers gagged
Washington tries to quash scandal over neglect of wounded
troops
[3 March 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |