BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
IN AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH THESE REPORTERS, CARNEY EXPLAINED, "I JUST GOT TIRED OF ALL THE BULLS**T, YOU KNOW? EVERY DAY I STOOD UP AND LIED AND HAD TO LIE AGAIN THE NEXT DAY. IT GOT SO BAD THAT I COULDN'T EVEN JERK OFF ANYMORE BECAUSE I FOUND MYSELF SO DISGUSTING. WHAT I'M HOPING TO DO IS SPEND SOME TIME WITH MYSELF NOW, GET TO KNOW MYSELF AGAIN, RUB A COUPLE OUT, YOU KNOW?"
ASKED WHAT HE WOULD MISS THE MOST, JAY CARNEY SAID, "NOT ONE DAMN THING. NOT. ONE. DAMN. THING."
Do you really think the only failure at VA currently is the issue of secret lists?
If you're a gasbag or a reporter who never does any work, you may think so. Those of us who've done the work, who've attended these hearings, know the wait list is only one of many failures at the VA. We also grasp that the VA has operated under a culture of secrecy. They tell Congress there's progress, Congress requests proof of that, proof is not supplied and, if the veterans community is lucky, a press expose reveals the VA is lying. Without that expose, the Congress is repeatedly stonewalled by Congress.
With the exception of field hearings, I believe I've only missed three Congressional VA hearings since 2006. I'm really not in the mood for lies and I'm especially not in the mood for lies from people who didn't bother to ever attend even one hearing in the last eight years.
On the Thursday morning hearing, Ruth reported on it in "Blind veteran describes computer issues" and I covered it in yesterday's snapshot and it's noted at the end of "VA did not make providing quality care a primary goal" and "A few comments on Senator Richard Burr." We were going to cover it today. Hopefully, we'll have room and time. But Shinseki's resignation and the press spin means we have to go the second hearing yesterday, yesterday afternoon's hearing of the House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Disability and Memorial Affairs.
First, let's note the statement Chair Jeff Miller issued today:
May 30, 2014
WASHINGTON, D.C.— Following the announcement of VA Secretary Eric Shinseki’s resignation, Chairman Jeff Miller released the following statement.
"Everybody knows Eric Shinseki is an honorable man whose dedication to our country is beyond reproach. I thank him for his legacy of service to our nation. Unfortunately, Shinseki's tenure at the Department of Veterans Affairs will forever be tainted by a pervasive lack of accountability among poorly performing VA employees and managers, apparent widespread corruption among medical center officials and an unparalleled lack of transparency with Congress, the public and the press. Appropriately, Shinseki is taking the brunt of the blame for these problems, but he is not the only one within VA who bears responsibility. Nearly every member of Shinseki's inner circle failed him in a major way. Those who surrounded Shinseki shielded him from crucial facts and hid bad news reports, in the process convincing him that some of the department’s most serious, well documented and systemic issues were merely isolated incidents to be ignored. Eric Shinseki trusted the VA bureaucracy, and the VA bureaucracy let him down.”
“Right now, VA needs a leader who will take swift and decisive action to discipline employees responsible for mismanagement, negligence and corruption that harms veterans while taking bold steps to replace the department’s culture of complacency with a climate of accountability. VA’s problems are deadly serious, and whomever the next secretary may be, they will receive no grace period from America’s veterans, American taxpayers and Congress.” – Rep. Jeff Miller, Chairman, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
"Everybody knows Eric Shinseki is an honorable man whose dedication to our country is beyond reproach. I thank him for his legacy of service to our nation. Unfortunately, Shinseki's tenure at the Department of Veterans Affairs will forever be tainted by a pervasive lack of accountability among poorly performing VA employees and managers, apparent widespread corruption among medical center officials and an unparalleled lack of transparency with Congress, the public and the press. Appropriately, Shinseki is taking the brunt of the blame for these problems, but he is not the only one within VA who bears responsibility. Nearly every member of Shinseki's inner circle failed him in a major way. Those who surrounded Shinseki shielded him from crucial facts and hid bad news reports, in the process convincing him that some of the department’s most serious, well documented and systemic issues were merely isolated incidents to be ignored. Eric Shinseki trusted the VA bureaucracy, and the VA bureaucracy let him down.”
“Right now, VA needs a leader who will take swift and decisive action to discipline employees responsible for mismanagement, negligence and corruption that harms veterans while taking bold steps to replace the department’s culture of complacency with a climate of accountability. VA’s problems are deadly serious, and whomever the next secretary may be, they will receive no grace period from America’s veterans, American taxpayers and Congress.” – Rep. Jeff Miller, Chairman, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
I think that's a fair assessment. I don't think many -- if any -- believe Shinseki set out to deceive or that he was trying to damage veterans. He fought some members of Congress (Senator Jim Webb) to get those suffering from Agent Orange the help they need. That's a major accomplishment and no one can take that away from Shinseki. We gave him credit for that. When there were some veterans groups attacking him because a veteran got arrested and would be prosecuted by a relative of Shinseki, we stated here that Eric Shinseki is responsible for his role as Secretary of the VA and he is not responsible for family members carrying out actions in other jobs and positions.
Shinseki couldn't provide oversight. He was said to be to easy to please. He didn't dig for answers. The next person who heads the VA has to be determined and needs a new staff who will repeatedly probe various programs and various medical centers to ensure that problems within the VA are known at the top.
Now for yesterday afternoon's hearing. We're going to the second panel and to Assistant Inspector General for Audits and Evaluations Linda Halliday.
Disability claims. How's that going? Shinseki had said it would be down to 125 days by 2015 -- Fiscal Year 2015 which means October of this year. Mere months away. And the number of days currently to process these disability claims? 249.
But, somehow, by magic?, in five months, that 249 is supposed to drop to 125.
This is part of the VA problem and where's the press on it?
With Quick Start claims-processing, Halliday explained, VBA had managed, over the last two years to drop down to 249 days -- from 291. But in five months, they're going to magically halve the current 249 and have 125?
That's going to be some feat to pull off. (No, they're not going to meet the deadline.)
If you paid attention to her testimony, you saw how it might happen. VBA wanted to shave off 41 days -- just not count them -- and claim they didn't count. That's the sort of nonsense that goes to a lack of accountability. VA gets the numbers they want by lying about the numbers. That needs to stop immediately. You can't shave off 41 days, pretend they never took place, just because it will give you better numbers. Honesty is a core value that needs to be stressed, taught and reinforced at the VA.
Quick Star has not improved the number of days for these claims -- despite having "quick" in the title -- but maybe it's done something with accuracy?
No.
In 2011, the accuracy rate was 62%. Last year, they raised that to 69% which might seem good except the October 1st deadline, when Fiscal Year 2015 kicks off? Shinseki had pledged Quick Start would have reached 98% accuracy by that point. So in five months, watch for it, the accuracy rate is supposed to jump from 69% to 98% on Quick Start's disability claims.
Quick Start aside, the VA's shell game with the backlog. We called that out when it was presented in a hearing as the big new plan that was going to save every veteran. Briefly, slap a ruling on a claim and then the claim isn't in the backlog! No, but it may be in the appeals system. And that's what's happened. That is now the fast growing segment on disability claims. The press is beginning to notice but mainly because VSOs are raising the issue. But when this came up and we called it out here I noted at one point that if an error was made in the favor of a veteran it should be like a Monopoly card "Bank error in your favor." And this led to e-mails about how the government couldn't afford it and I noted that the more likely scenario was veterans getting underpayment not overpayments. In her testimony, Halliday addressed inaccurate claims that had been re-decided. Here are the amounts through July 2012: veterans were overpaid $463,000 and veterans were underpaid $2.8 million.
You can keep that mind as we note this exchange from the hearing. Chair Jon Runyan is the Subcommittee Chair.
Chair Jon Runyan: As you know, while VBA is reporting timeliness an equal, if not greater, concern is the accuracy for each veteran. VBA is looking at hundreds of thousands of claims. And the veteran is looking at one and only one. Ms. Halliday, accuracy, as highlighted in your testimony, is a serious concern. I'd like to also ask you a question about of VBA's quality components Start. You noted that VBA's Start program has several classification errors such as benefit entitlement, decision documentation/notification and administrative. Mr. Murphy [VA's Thomas Murphy, from the hearing's first panel] responded to an inquiry of Star's failure to count error incidents with potential to effect veterans benefits such as when a claims folder lacked required evidence including medical examination or an opinion needed to make an accurate decision. Can you comment on that?
Linda Halliday: Yes, I would appreciate that. The OIG [Office of Inspector General] uses a broader definition of what constitutes an error. We report errors that effect veterans benefits as well as those that have the potential to effect veterans benefits in the future if left uncorrected. We think this is important. It's a veteran-centric approach. We do not feel that the Start program counts all of its errors. There is a disagreement between what OIG considers an error and how VBA calculates its accuracy rate. I have a couple of examples here that we think might help you understand. VBA does not consider an incorrect disability evaluation to be a benefit entitlement error unless the error impacted the veterans overall combined disability evaluation. However, OIG would identify this case as an error because it has the potential to effect the future benefits if left undetected. And that also has a corresponding effect -- it could effect other programs too as the ratings change. Also, cases where VBA staff simply do not request or significantly delay requesting the mandatory routine future examinations to determine whether the temporary 100% disability rating should continue, we clearly call an error. We see a significant financial impact associated with not managing those claims appropriately.
Okay, right there is where the gas bags need to be paying attention.
Cooked books? How did they get to that point?
With a long-standing practice of weaseling the truth.
The OIG is the watchdog for the VA. If they're calling it an error, it's an error. Stop fighting the terms and definitions. More plainly: Stop lying to make yourselves look better.
Tolerating these lies encourages more fudging and more dishonesty.
No Department should lie. But with the VA, the lies just never end. The next Secretary of the VA should make the announcement that what the OIG defines as an error will be the same definition that the VA will use.
Some of the gas bags are blaming it on a "vacationing Congress." Gasbag Brent Budowsky (at The Hill) insists, "Congress, deeply enmeshed in another one of its many ludicrous recesses of vacationing and fundraising, successfully demanded the head of the general." While Memorial Day was Monday, I've sat through three Congressional hearings this week. The House Veterans Affairs Committee -- in full and in Subcommittees -- has held three hearings this week.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
