Instead of continually having them be treated at poorly run, ineffective, unacceptable government-run ‘healthcare’ facilities?
Michelle Malkin has more links, including a spot-on one from David Bernstein at The Volokh Conspiracy:
If private companies had mismanaged outpatient care for veterans the way the V.A. system has, there would be strong calls from all the usual quarters for a government takeover, and proclamations of how we can’t trust “greedy” for-profit companies to take care of veterans. Funny how this thought process doesn’t seem to work in reverse, except among “free market ideologues,” who have been criticizing the V.A. for years.
Jason at Countercolumn notes that this isn’t new news, except now it’s being reported by a major media outlet where it’s getting a lot more coverage than it has before. I’ve personally heard of examples of the VA’s shoddy healthcare system for years, but usually all you get from Congress is a lot of posturing, flag-waving, ‘outrage’, and money-throwing. And watch, after all the hearings are over and all the firings, retirements, and replacements occur, Congress will get back to doing what they do best: throwing money and rhetoric at something that is best handled by the private sector and should have been handled that way all along.
PM Update: A reader who is a Vietnam vet wrote in:
The quality of treatment one receives at a military medical facility often depends upon the luck of the draw, and where you happen to be located (geographically speaking). As is the case in the civilian healthcare world, there are cutting edge facilities staffed by talented personnel, and then there are “others.” My own personal experience with (active duty) military med facilities is a mixed bag, ranging all the way from “shameful” to “adequate, but certainly nothing to crow about.” I cannot comment on VA hospitals (which are a different animal entirely) -as I have never been treated in one.
I am (like many others) unhappy at the sight of rundown buildings, etc, at Walter Reed. But then, I saw lots of that kind of thing thirty-plus years ago when I was still in uniform. So I am hardly surprised.
As to any congressional hearings that may arise from the Walter Reed story, I figure to be extremely skeptical. Most of the sitting members in the House and Senate that I hear squealing the loudest have been in D.C. for many years. If the state of military medicine and healthcare facilities were really important to them, we’d have heard something from these “servants of the people” long before now. But as I see it, it’ll just be another photo op, and little else.
To be perfectly honest, I’d be thrilled if military hospitals ceased to exist and the patients were farmed out to specialty medical facilities in the civilian sector. As you know, we have (in this country) some of the finest ER/trauma/surgery/etc hospitals as exist in the entire world. I think our soldiers/sailors/airmen would be served at least as well through them as they are through existing military hospitals. Granted, it can’t all be “outsourced,” since we’d still have to maintain frontline med units to evacuate and provide immediate care to those taken right from battlefields. But I think it’s high time we considered different ways of providing essential care for our people in the military services.
We can certainly do better than our record suggests. “Because it’salways been done that way” is NOT a good reason.
Indeed.
| Email This Post | Print This |
I seperated from active duty in 1995. I can personally attest that the veterans care system, at least every VA facility I have ever been too was slow, old and run down.
Sure, that may seem anecdotal, but consider that it mirrors alot of the complaints about the active duty health care as well. I can also say from 12 years active duty that that the military system is just as bad.
I have no ideas or answers for the problem, but I have to make note that anyone who is now suddenly discovering that the system is broken has not been paying attention.
Comment by karl @ 3/5/2007 - 10:52 am
In my opinion the problem with the VA and Walter Reed exist because they both are simply classic government bureaucracies! Their existence is to perpetuate the status quo and maintain the standard of living for the bureaucrats,internal and external, which is basically all employed. And as you might guess, most are Democrat. If expenses are cut from one area, the next budget year reflects less money dispensed there.
It has been 30 years since I worked in one but I doubt much has changed.
Comment by SEW @ 3/5/2007 - 1:57 pm
In addition to karl and SEW’s comment, they’re not afraid to speak their mind about it either! Naturally, I called them on their inane babbling. Freedom of expression if you lack moonbat rants in your speech-Das Verbotten!
I wondered (NOT!) why it took THREE attempts to get my new photo ID mailed to me.
Meanwhile in Al and NO, where do you think the most progress is being made re:Katrina?
Comment by forest hunter @ 3/5/2007 - 5:32 pm
David Bernstein’s point is very well taken. I agree completely. The time is long past when the government got out of this provision and helped provide care at private healthcare facilities.
One other thought - if substandard care is par for the course at these government run hospitals, isn’t it logical to be concerned that the entire health care system will go the same route if we enact a HillaryCare system? Somehow I don’t think the left-wing politicos who are preening for the cameras now will make that connection.
Comment by Great White Rat @ 3/5/2007 - 5:51 pm
Beat me to it, Rat. As bad as the VA can be, it’s really nationalized health care writ small. It’s the same thing the Dems point so proudly to up in Canada, and the same thing they’d make us (not them, to be sure - you can bet money that the Edwards and Kennedys and Clintons would pay for premium medical care) all suffer under.
This is just a snapshot of one of those Americas Edwards likes to talk about. And it’s the one he won’t be living in.
Comment by Steve Skubinna @ 3/5/2007 - 10:50 pm