It seems that no one is faster to wrap themselves in the flag these days than the Republicans who started it but refuse to fight it. Yet, even as they refuse to volunteer to serve in the military, these people have never hesitated to claim that they "Support the Troops," waving flags and planting yard signs. But in the treatment of our nation's veterans--in other words in the only metric that counts for anything--the Republican Party's record in the last seven years has been worse than dismal.
This past week saw revelations that the Bush administration financial team at the Pentagon has been going after seriously wounded veterans, pressuring them to return all or part of their signing bonuses because they failed to finish their tours in combat zones as the result of grievous, debilitating wounds.
The Bush administration responded as it always does with a slightly embarrassed "aw shucks, ya caught me" shrug, and claims that the misconduct--which clearly stemmed from the pursuit of a systematic policy choice by the Bushies--was nothing more than a misunderstanding, a glitch in the system.
The same troubling reports every six months or so, whenever they can intrude upon stories about the latest self-destructing starlet or make it into presidential debates past a corporate media that would rather discuss that age-old quandary of "diamonds-versus-pearls."
The last time we paused to pay attention to the care of our veterans--and most especially to the the care for our wounded veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan--was in January and February of 2007. The conditions uncovered at Walter Reed persist--they do so because it is the policy of the Bush administration to ensure that they do.
Before this year's scandals, there was the relatively minor upset over attempts by the Bushies to force wounded soldiers to pay for their own food while staying at U.S. facilities for treatment. Is that how the Republican Party treats wounded heroes?
Yes, it is, and it is all a matter of Republican Policy. The architect of this policy is a Bush political appointee, another example of how Republican economic quackery works against the basic interests of ordinary (and in this case extraordinary) Americans:
The policy and purse strings are controlled by the top civilian leaders at the Pentagon. Perhaps the most influential among them is Dr. David S.C. Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, who has responsibility for military healthcare, including disability benefits, and who reports directly to the secretary of defense. Chu, an economist, mathematician and former Army comptroller, has been in that role since the summer of 2001. He told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month he was "deeply chagrined" by the Walter Reed fiasco.
But veterans advocates roundly criticized Chu after he famously told the Wall Street Journal in early 2005 that the Pentagon was spending too much on veterans' benefits, and they remain deeply skeptical of him. "What is happening at Walter Reed and other military facilities is a natural consequence of trying to fight the war on the cheap," said Rick Weidman, who works with Vietnam Veterans of America. When it comes to Army healthcare, he said, "it was David Chu who was running that train."[1]
In other words, the Bush administration is running the Veterans Affairs like an HMO, actively looking for ways to deny our veterans care!
And these are really just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. There are so many other failures on the part of the Bush administration towards veterans and active duty servicemen and women. Time and space limit me to simple bullet point list at the tail end of this post:
- George W. Bush is attempting to appoint the man who helped create the current crisis in veteran care to head the Department of Veteran Affairs. Here's hoping Senator Jim Webb spikes this particular appointment.
- George W. Bush continues to employ Dr. David S.C. Chu, a man who has been publicly quoted as saying that veterans enjoyed too many benefits, as his senior policy advisor on the pay and benefits of the members of our military.
- George W. Bush opposed pay increases for active duty servicemen and women.
- George W. Bush failed to do anything to address veterans' concerns about intolerable waiting times, a lack of care for post-traumatic stress syndrome, and catastrophic brain injury. Democrats have added $3.7 billion to the budget to address these shortfalls, but George W. Bush has threatened to veto this additional care for our veterans.[2]
It should come as no surprise then that Republicans don't seem capable of doing right by our nation's veterans. The President of the United States, George W. Bush, and his hand-chosen senior advisor on veterans benefits, Dr. David S.C. Chu, regard our veterans as being spoiled, the recipients of too many benefits.