In response to Glenn Greenwald’s accusation of administration neglect inflicted on soldiers belying its interest in their welfare, Dan Collins posted this.
As Themistocles points out in the comments, the account of problems at Walter Reed detailed in the Dana Priest/Anne Hull series distinguishes the problems found in Building 18 from the well-maintained facility as a whole (all cites from this WaPo piece unless otherwise noted):
While the hospital is a place of scrubbed-down order and daily miracles, with medical advances saving more soldiers than ever, the outpatients in the Other Walter Reed encounter a messy bureaucratic battlefield nearly as chaotic as the real battlefields they faced overseas.
However, the conflation of Building 18 with the other facilities of Walter Reed begin in the title (Soldiers Face Neglect, Frustration At Army’s Top Medical Facility) and continue throughout the days of coverage.
As the initial Priest/Hull story points out, the problems of Building 18 are not representative, but symbolic, and, indeed, are not even necessarily representative of Building 18…
Not all of the quarters are as bleak as Duncan’s, but the despair of Building 18 symbolizes a larger problem in Walter Reed’s treatment of the wounded…
It would be unfair to suggest that the acute Jack Murtha, in his many visits, to Walter Reed, would have noticed anything amiss. As Priest and Hull point out:
This world is invisible to outsiders. Walter Reed occasionally showcases the heroism of these wounded soldiers and emphasizes that all is well under the circumstances. President Bush, former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and members of Congress have promised the best care during their regular visits to the hospital’s spit-polished amputee unit, Ward 57.
Priest and Hull neglect to mention Mr. Murtha, or any Democrat, by name as they juxtapose the squalor they documented at Walter Reed withthe presumed sincere concern demonstrated by the visitations of President Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld, but Jack Murtha has not been so reticent. In an December 18, 2005 OpEd for the Arizona Republic, Murtha stated that…
I have been visiting our wounded troops at Bethesda and Walter Reed hospitals almost every week since the beginning of the war.
Mutha’s solicitude for our wounded troops has not gone unobserved, as a Nov 17 2005 AP piece noted:
His voice cracked and tears filled his eyes as he related several stories of visiting wounded troops, including one who was blinded and lost both his hands but had been denied a Purple Heart because friendly fire caused his injuries.
The Post certainly saw it as fitting to followup their reportage with an inquiry of previous visitors to Walter Reed with respect to how the problems had gone unnoticed:
Snow said Bush “first learned of the troubling allegations regarding Walter Reed from the stories this weekend in The W Post. He is deeply concerned and wants any problems identified and fixed.” The spokesman said he did not know why the president, who has visited the facility many times in the past five years, had not heard about these problems before.
Moreover, the Post notes that irrespective of the outlier status of Building 18, previous visits to Walter Reed proper are certainly a basis for a good-faith questioning of how the visitors could have been so unaware of the problems at the facility:
Walter Reed’s fixes are unlikely immediately to quiet the criticism from members of Congress, who received a flood of calls from the public and veterans groups asking how the problems could have been unknown to officials – some of whom regularly visit Walter Reed
Of course, any fair reading of Priest and Hull’s stories lead to the conclusion that no visitir could have been expected to have been aware of the problems that have been found. Who would have ever suspected such problems existed?
Jack Murtha supplies the answer in his statement earlier this week:
Exacerbating the problems at these facilities was last year’s announcement of the BRAC closing of Walter Reed. I was then and remain concerned that with the knowledge of the closing, especially during a time of war, facility maintenance and/or upgrades might be ignored or placed on the back burner. Thus over the past few years, the Defense Subcommittee has appropriated additional funding for operation, facility maintenance and equipment at specified medical facilities.”
Much as Republicans were justifiably excoriated for failing to follow up on suspicions with respect to gravely threatening instant messages by disgraced congressman Mark Foley, I am certain that Dana Priest will be assiduously investigating how Jack Murtha could have suspected our soldiers were living in squalor, and yet failed to act on this knowledge until presented with the problem in the press.
Murtha should be particularly illuminating. As Priest noted on February 18, funding issues have played a definite role in the problems at Walter Reed:
Wilson, the clinical social worker at Walter Reed, was part of a staff team that recognized Building 18’s toll on the wounded. He mapped out a plan and, in Sep, was given a $30,000 grant from the Commander’s Initiative Account for improvements. He ordered some equipment, including a pool table and air hockey table, which have not yet arrived. A Psychiatry Department functionary held up the rest of the money because she feared that buying a lot of recreational equipment close to Christmas would trigger an audit, Wilson said.
In Jan, Wilson was told that the funds were no longer available and that he would have to submit a new request.
Murtha, from his seat on the Subcommittee on Defense of the House Appropriations Committee, would be a foremost expert on funding issues and their impact on Army facilities. Priest will have a bit of difficulty doing background research in advance of her Murtha interview, as his page on Veteran’s Health Issues is currently 404. [emphases ours; ed. note that we condemn the spit-polishing of any amputee ward]
ack – I sent you a proofed version – would you mind making the edits? … sorry –
Did I miss anything important?
no – just spelling – I composed the thing in the little Yahoo compose window – should have sent it to myself first –
The House of Mirtha
That’s a suspiciously literary reference. You wouldn’t be one ‘o them there litterchure perfessers, wouldja?
I teach Men’s Literature, Angie. We’re doing Moby Dick right now. Sure, Ishmael’s aunt comes to drop off some cookies before he departs, and a she-whale gives birth on the high seas during the story, but other than those two minor blemishes it’s just a bunch of guys on a sea cruise, killing cetaceans. Arrrrrhhh.
I thought The Decider had complete control of the military during “war” time?
Using the administration’s failure to care for wounded vets to attack Murtha? What do you think Murtha’s been talking about for the past year?
Look at Murtha’s original statement that caused him to become the right’s number one combat vet to swiftboat:
Our military and their families are stretched thin. Many say that the Army is broken. Some of our troops are on their third deployment. Recruitment is down, even as our military has lowered its standards. Defense budgets are being cut. Personnel costs are skyrocketing, particularly in health care. Choices will have to be made. We can not allow promises we have made to our military families in terms of service benefits, in terms of their health care, to be negotiated away.
The poor conditions at Walter Reed are just a small part of the problem. There are OEF and OIF combat vets living in the streets waiting for the Pentagon to process their claims. There are vet families borrowing money from loan sharks to pay their bills while waiting for checks.
Turns out Murtha’s been right all along. We can’t provide adequate care for our wounded vets while fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Sliming Murtha can’t change the truth.
We’re not sliming him, alphie. We’re asking, who didn’t know what, and when didn’t they know it?
I teach Men’s Literature, Angie.
So, nunna that femmy Edith Wharton crap, right? Although you might give ‘em Ethan Frome, just to serve as a counter-example.
Howsabout Kipling? There better be some damned Kipling. Conrad? Hemmingway? You teach poetry? Robert W. Service? (he’s SWMNBN’s favorite, sadly) Banjo Paterson? Manly men, all.
Walter Scott’s kinda iffy, what with all that flowery language (ministering angel thou, my ass), but he does write about killin’ ‘n stuff, so he’s probably OK.
Do you ever tell the kids, “I like a bit of Trollope from time to time”?
Looks to me like you’re trying to say a Congressman who’s been yelling about the poor care our veterans have been receiving for over a year (while at the same time getting targeted by the right’s slime machine) has somehow…what?
Not been complaining enough to be heard over the din?
I might cave on “Roman Fever,” just to show some woman-on-woman violence. I have a bumper sticker that says, “I’d Rather Be Doing Elizabeth Bennett.”
Has somehow, despite his interest, not discovered the infamous secrets of
Hangar 84Building 18.Sure we can, alphie. We just have to want to more than we want to use them to score political points. So what are you doing about the problem?
And it’s not like there’s not any fluff we could cut from elsewhere to help. Perhaps the vets are more important than any of hundreds of earmarked projects?
There are vets far worse off than the vets that were stashed in that rat’s nest, Dan.
Sounds to me like you’re actually accusing Murtha of not being spin savvy enough to realize that highlighting this particular case would break through the round-the-clock Anna Nicole Smith coverage for a few minutes.
Maybe Murtha would have done a better job getting our vets the care they need if you guys hadn’t been constantly calling him a traitor.
BTW, alphie, the VA isn’t part of the DoD. The VA is a separate bureaucracy, under a different cabinet secretary. I’m sure there are veterans who have problems with DoD paperwork, and I’m aware that Walter Reed is a DoD facility, but stop confusing veterans issues with active military issues.
Particularly the false dilemma of caring for veterans and fighting the war. We can easily do both.
alphie–
Go back and consider what begat this line of argument. Then tell me what the point of this is.
Maybe Murtha would have done a better job getting that care if he hadn’t been advocating our abandonment of Iraq. His fervent efforts on the part of getting us defeated tends to discredit him on other matters.
Because, really, which of his messages has he been working harder at getting out?
Well, Dana Priest’s reportage has gotten some results, at least. I watched NBC news and they were showing repair crews swarming all over the building. A bunch of red tape and/or union obstructionism seems to have vanished this week. If it’s to the weal of the warriors, then I’m all for it.
Alphie: Admit it. You don’t give a rat ass who gets what and or, when. You want to use whatever is at hand to cudgel your opponents. Why stop at OEF and OIF vets? You drive by today and claim a little self-rightous indignation for yourself. Where were you last week, last year, ten, twenty, thirty years ago? Spare me your concern and I will spare you mine. Yes, I am above21.
Dan,
A post called The House of Mirtha that contains this line:
I am certain that Dana Priest will be assiduously investigating how Jack Murtha could have suspected our soldiers were living in squalor, and yet failed to act on this knowledge until presented with the problem in the press.
Are you saying this post isn’t some bizarre attempt to attack Jack Murtha with a story that shows he’s been right all along?
No, guess again.
bush is an idiot. whoever wrote that is stupid!!
alphie, in your response to Dan’s original post, you wrote:
Dana Priest’s reporting deliberately introduces the suggestion that Republicans, particularly Bush and Rumsfeld, have visited Walter Reed for pr purposes:
That is not the whole story. She doesn’t make any mention of Democrats who have done the same, and certainly none have done so more floridly than Murtha:
Whatever the merits of Dana Priest’s reporting, there is no harm in pointing out that there is an agenda riding shotgun. If Murtha is now saying he realized that care may have been substandard but did nothing but dine out on his stories of visiting wounded troops, then it seems clear that whatever oversight that it is NOW appropriate for Congress to undertake, could just have usefully been initiated by Murtha last year.
As usual alfi is more interested in trying to score cheap debating points than in addressing the issue.
Murtha is a politician. Politicians can use their power and influence to effect reforms or they can use them to make political capital.
It seems to me that Dan is suggesting that Murtha has been more concerned with making poitical capital than with addressing the plight of the wounded.
You suggestion that the USA is too poor properly to care for its wounded is asinine. You should recognise your error and withdraw your assertion.
I agree that we could adequately fund care for our veterans, furris.
The real question is how we’d do it.
Don’t forget, the pro-war people who are currently escalating the number of troops we have in Iraq and Afghanistan at a considerable cost are also committed to:
1. Reducing the federal budget deficit.
2. Not raising taxes.
Where’s the money (and the instant supply of new doctors and nurses) going to come from?
Please don’t just suggest cutting the enormous supply of magic librul bucks going to the poor, name the programs you think we could cut.
Here’s a handy guide to help you.
Cancel your subscription to the United Nations. That will save you enough money to look after your wounded and send sufficient troops to Afghanistan to achieve victory alongside your British, Australian and Canadian allies.
furris,
Could we stay in reality land for this one kinda important discussion?
Total U.S. contributions to the U.N. run about $2 billion a year.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are running almost 100 times that amount, say $175 billion plus extras like the care of wounded vets and replacing the helicopters we’re losing lately.
The Veterans Administration budget is running at about $80 billion a year.
Say we need another $10 billion a year and we cut the $2 billion we’re sending to the U.N.
Still gotta find another $8 billion for the vets and probably $10 billion more for the “Surges” without raising taxes or increasing the deficit.
What do we cut next?
I’m being entirely serious, alfi. If you can’t cover it with 2 billion, give the money to us and let us get on with it.
Our wounded are reduced to sharing civilian wards with Islamist supporters, our vehicles are not IED proof, our helicopters and C 130s are clapped out, our sole FGA is a few obsolescent Harriers and you complain that 2 billion isn’t enough?
Join the real world.
Please note, by the way, that what you call
, I call the pro peace people who are determined to establish societies in Afghanistan and Iraq which are not bent on the destruction through terror of the Western world.
By “we” I’m assuming you’re talking about the government of Afghanistan, furris?
Our troops are quite expensive, about $750,000 a year for each one deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq.
Are you saying you’d rather just take the cash?
I have no problem with that.
Though I fear the rather corrupt governments we have set up in those countries would pocket most of the funds, leaving little for their armed forces.
Where did I say ‘we’? How do you manage to go on making these leaps of incomprehension without pulling a hamstring?
No, alfi, I am not an Afghan.
Please note also that I spoke only of winning in Afghanistan and treating your wounded properly. I didn’t mention Iraq. Try to stick to the point.
Aaah, Harriers = British, furris?
I think your guys will be home before ours are.
Not if we have to rely on our own air trooping resources.
Glad to see a spark of patriotism still burns in your corrupted soul when you’re teased properly.
Sorry to disappoint you, furris, but I fear my soul’s corruption is complete.
I applaud the Brit’s decision to start cutting and running from Iraq.
Provided they move from Iraq to Afghanistan, which is precisely what they are doing, I can live with the redeployment too.
Cut & run is a naval expression, alfi. Don’t try to muddy the waters.
What do we cut next?
The starting point would be for our president to declare the final end of FDR’s war, and remove nearly all of the US troops and support from Germany, the rest of Europe, Okinawa, Japan, South Korea, etc. Our troops have been there for over sixty years now, still trying to pacify these parts of the world after the declaration of “mission accomplished” in 1945. Time to declare that our mission in these places is over. Bring the boys home in waves, with a brief 3-month redeployment to Afghanistan or Iraq on the way home. Think of the savings!
This story can’t possibly be right. Krugman and DeLong have both promised us that the VA is a shining light, a beacon of hope for socialized medicine, and proof that the government is capable of taking care of all of us. I’m sure that if the VA has any problems, it’s part of a conspiratorial plot by the evil Republicans to deny us our right to collective health care.
Neil
I have been blogging for about four years and during that time I’ve built up a readership, some of which are soldiers both in and out of Iraq (they probably visit because I run skin once in a while) who email stuff. I blogged in anger about the treatment at Walter Reed, treatment that I have no first hand knowlede about, but I wrongly assumed that my prior experiences with the VA were the same as at Reed. Then I received four emails from guys who have emailed me once or twice in the past and whom I know have been at Reed (now discharged) and know the place. All tell me that the care and atmosphere there is first rate, that the nurses were caring and good, and the food absolutely shitty (there is no way that military cooking comes up to a four star restaurant). BUT all the emails tell me that the situation in Building 18 has been blown way out of proportion. All say that when you are moved there you are basically OK and it’s mostly a rehab place; almost all military bases have too old buildings that need to be replaced; that Reed itself couldn’t be better. It is too bad that an agenda driven WaPo deliberately exaggerated the Reed hospital to bolster their anti-war position; and it is only amazing that a Hospital visited literally hundreds of times by every scumbag politico on the planet somehow or other was a hell hole they couldn’t recognize. Absolutely the officer in charge did NO INSPECTIONS of the Building; it is he that should bear the brunt of all legit criticism. All of us who blog never received any emails telling of rats, mold, falling ceilings, ugly nurses, indifferent care, or anything at all and since I’ve been a critic of the war since the tenth day after we had found NO WMDs, I think I’d have received a ton
Take your pick.
I had been told by a lady who worked at a Veterans Hospital not far from, my hjome that though she had voted Re[publican and had supported Bush it was clear that he and his congress had made serious cuts to veterans hospital money since he took office. I have no source to know whether or not this is true. Anyone do know?
My God, it sounds like a massive federal bureaucracy isn’t the best way to run health care! Who’d have thunk it?
Confronted with this new evidence, leftists everywhere will immediately disavow any notion of nationalized health care.
Anyways, it’s nice to see that Basra is stabilized enough for Brits to go home, even if the pro-terrorist crowd here at home is determined to spin it as bad news.
Fred,
I haven’t looked into the specifics, but here’s the budget page. You’ll probably want to look into out-year projection changes from previous year’s budgets to get a sense of what is being suggested.
BRD