This is night time footage of a U.S. air assault against Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Militia. Podcast
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/02.01/99-vets.html
Terror war could strain veterans'
health, benefit systems
U.S. unprepared for impact of returning soldiers, KSG
researcher says
By Alvin Powell
Harvard News Office
The cost of caring for veterans of the war on terror could reach $662 billion over the next 40 years, while demand from returning soldiers is already clogging the two major veterans' assistance programs, according to recent research from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Linda J. Bilmes, a lecturer in public policy and former chief financial officer and assistant secretary
of the U.S. Commerce Department, said the ongoing cost of providing medical care and disability benefits for returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans is a cost of the war on terror that the Bush administration hasn't adequately prepared for.
Even in a best-case scenario, the long-term costs of providing disability benefits and medical care for returning veterans of the war on terror will reach $350 billion over 40 years, Bilmes' research shows.
Bilmes presented her study, "Soldiers Returning from Iraq and Afghanistan: The Long-Term Costs of Providing Veterans Medical Care and Disability Benefits," Jan. 5 at the annual meeting of the Allied Social Sciences Association in Chicago.
One of the driving factors in the high postwar costs is that far more soldiers are surviving injuries that would have killed them in earlier conflicts. According to the data from the Department of Veterans Affairs, there are 16 "nonmortally wounded" soldiers for every battlefield death, a number that dwarfs the 2.6 wounded per death in Vietnam, and the fewer than two wounded per death in World War I and II. Other factors driving costs include the large numbers of solders who do not fall into the "wounded" category, but who will be eligible for disability payments because of other medical problems, such as mental health conditions.
While the larger numbers of survivors - reflecting improvements in medical care and protective gear - is good news, it also leaves a larger legacy of the war to contend with after the fighting stops.
The costs come from two major programs available to returning soldiers. The first is a cash disability payment administered by the Veterans Benefits Administration. Payment varies according to the level of disability of the veteran, from $1,304 per year for those with a 10 percent disability, up to $44,000 annually for those fully disabled. Bilmes projects disability payments at between $67.63 billion and $126.76 billion over the next 40 years, depending on how long the war lasts and how many additional military personnel are called to action. The estimates are based on a key assumption, that 44 percent of veterans - the same percentage as in the first Gulf War - eventually claim disability.
More expensive will be the cost of providing medical care to returning veterans, her research shows. The second major benefit for veterans is care at the nation's system of veterans' hospitals and clinics run by the Veterans Health Administration.
Veterans are entitled to free medical care for two years after returning from duty and then can continue to obtain care by paying a co-payment prorated according to the veteran's level of disability.
Depending on the number of troops that wind up serving in the war on terror, Bilmes calculated the cost of providing ongoing care for returning veterans suffering physical or mental disabilities at between $282 billion and $536 billion. Again, she assumed Iraq and Afghanistan veterans would utilize the medical care system at the same rate as in the first Gulf War, or 50 percent.
"It's another entitlement. It's like a mini-Medicare,
Compounding the projected high cost of caring for returned veterans, Bilmes said, is the fact that their sheer numbers are already overwhelming the system.
The backlog of applications for disability payments has risen from 69,000 in 2000 to 400,000 today, while the time it takes to process an initial claim averages six months. Appeals can take up to two years. That delay leaves some veterans without financial support during the critical first months after returning to civilian life.
"It's a very critical time for active duty people who've been in hellish conditions, particularly for
reservists and guardsmen who [have returned to civilian life] and are not in the military family
anymore," Bilmes said.
In addition, the demand for medical treatment at VA medical facilities has grown, creating waiting lists long enough, according to one VA official Bilmes cites, to effectively deny treatment to some veterans.
Compared with the cost of waging the Iraq war, Bilmes said, fixing the backlog would be inexpensive.
Bilmes suggested looking to private industry for solutions. Private health insurance companies process claims in an average of 89.5 days. She also suggested either a "fast track" system set up specifically for Iraqi and Afghan war veterans to ensure their benefits aren't delayed, or doing away with a the initial processing entirely. This could be accomplished by adopting the IRS's model for tax returns, accepting all disability benefits applications and then conducting audits to ensure compliance and root out fraud.
More money will be needed to improve performance on the medical care side, reduce waiting lists, and provide the services needed by returning veterans, Bilmes said. She suggested funding additional social workers at the 207 smaller, walk-in Vet Centers to handle some of the mental health-related needs and ease the pressure on larger VA hospitals.
"People are sobered by the scale of it, but compared with other things going on it is more fixable," Bilmes said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/us/30wound.html
Agency Says Higher Casualty Total Was
Posted in Error
For the last few months, anyone who consulted the Veterans Affairs Department's Web site to learn how many American troops had been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan would have found this number: 50,508.
But on Jan. 10, without explanation, the figure plummeted to 21,649.
Which number is correct? The answer depends on a larger question, the definition of wounded. If the term includes combat or “hostile” injuries inflicted by the enemy, the definition the Pentagon uses, the smaller number would be right.
But if it also applies to injuries from accidents like vehicle crashes and to mental and physical illnesses that developed in the war zone, the meaning that veterans’ groups favor, 50,508 would be accurate.
A spokesman for the veterans’ department, Matt Burns, said the change in the count was made simply to correct an error. Mr. Burns said the department posted the higher figure by mistake in November, when an employee who was updating the site inadvertently added noncombat injuries listed by the Defense Department. The Pentagon Web site had the correct total all along.
The previous total on the Web site was 18,586, strictly for combat injuries. Apparently, no one noticed the sudden leap.
The 50,508 figure caught the attention of the Pentagon when Prof. Linda Bilmes of Harvard mentioned it in an opinion article on Jan. 5 in The Los Angeles Times. A few days later, said Professor Bilmes, who teaches public finance, she had a call from Dr. William Winkenwerder Jr., assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, challenging the number.
Professor Bilmes explained that she had used the government tally, the one on the “America’s Wars” page of the veterans’ department Web site. She faxed him a copy.
A few days later, the number on the Web site was changed.
A spokeswoman for Dr. Winkenwerder confirmed that he had called the veterans’ department to have the figure corrected and that the worker had misunderstood the Defense Department figures.
For her purposes, Professor Bilmes said, the higher figure was the relevant one because she was writing about the future demands that wounded veterans would place on the veterans’ health care system. Many of the veterans would be treated in the system regardless of whether they had been injured in combat or in vehicle crashes.
About 1.4 million troops have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, and more than 205,000 have sought care from the veterans’ agency, according to the government. Of those, more than 73,000 sought treatment for mental problems like post-traumatic stress disorder.
No one disputes that more 50,000 troops have been injured in Iraq and Afghanistan or that nonhostile injuries can be serious. Of the more than 3,000 deaths that have occurred, 600 have been listed as nonhostile.
The Pentagon generally directs reporters to www.defenselink.mil, which lists counts of the wounded and dead. The deaths are divided into hostile and nonhostile, but the injuries include just those “wounded in action.”
Another site on the Web, http://siadapp.dior.whs.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/castop.htm, shows diseases and nonhostile injuries. It is the source of the higher counts.
“The government keeps two sets of books,” said Paul Sullivan, director of research and analysis for Veterans of America. Until last March, Mr. Sullivan was a project manager in the Veterans Affairs Department who monitored the use of disability benefits by Afghanistan, gulf war and Iraq veterans.
He suggested that the differing numbers might be cleared up by a bill that has been introduced in the Senate to improve the collection of health information on Afghanistan and Iraq veterans.
Long-term Costs of VA rwp_07_001_bilmes.pdfTuesday, January 30, 2007
Saturday, January 27, 2007
BLOOMBERG LEAVES NEW YORK CITY’S 400,000 VETERANS OUT IN THE COLD
IGNORES VETS’ $5 MILLION REQUEST FOR SERVICES IN PRELIMINARY BUDGET PROPOSAL
CITY HALL -- Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg failed to include city veterans’ only budget request in today’s announcement of his preliminary budget for Fiscal Year 2008. The Coalition of Veterans Organizations, or COVO, a coalition of veterans organizations unified in making a $5 million request of the Mayor to fund Veterans Resource Centers across the city, made the following statement regarding the proposal’s omission from the budget proposal:
“Since 9/11, this city has watched its men and women answer the call to duty over and over again, with some losing there lives. Yet today, veterans are still faced with an under-funded Veterans' Administration and a city administration that has not done a correct and proper job in providing much-needed services. Specifically, the administration has historically under-funded the Mayor’s Office of Veterans Affairs, delayed making selections to the city’s Veterans Advisory Board, and provided a delayed and confusing fix to the City Employee Extended Benefits Package.
Despite a $3.9 billion budget surplus, our city’s veterans today received yet another “NO” from the Administration.
It is long overdue to honor our troops' sacrifices and our returning veterans with more than just bureaucratic hassles, runarounds and token gestures. The Mayor and his administration fail to understand that veterans, and more importantly our newest veterans, are looking for help with housing, education, jobs, healthcare and a host of other issues. They need knowledge of the array of programs that are available to them here in the city. They need some place where they can find all this information. Funding to create resource centers in each of the five boroughs would have been an important step towards showing a real commitment to veterans.
Supporting our troops and veterans is not only a national obligation, it is a local obligation as well. Poor treatment of veterans during a time of war is a disservice to all who have served. It is long overdue for our local elected officials to renew there commitment to its veteran’s and it starts with the Mayor.”
Friday, January 26, 2007
A killer Aeriel photo of the USS Iowa firing its big guns.
You've got to see this, it's pretty amazing. And I don't use that word lightly on Digg. Just check out the shockwave over that water, too cool.
Air Force Develops Ray Gun for Combat
Posted: 25 Jan 2007 09:52 PM CST
By ELLIOTT MINOR, Associated Press WriterThu Jan 25, 5:43 AM ET
The military calls its new weapon an “active denial system,” but that’s an understatement. It’s a ray gun that shoots a beam that makes people feel as if they are about to catch fire.
Apart from causing that terrifying sensation, the technology is supposed to be harmless _ a non-lethal way to get enemies to drop their weapons.
Military officials say it could save the lives of innocent civilians and service members in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
The weapon is not expected to go into production until at least 2010, but all branches of the military have expressed interest in it, officials said.
During the first media demonstration of the weapon Wednesday, airmen fired beams from a large dish antenna mounted atop a Humvee at people pretending to be rioters and acting out other scenarios that U.S. troops might encounter in war zones.
The device’s two-man crew located their targets through powerful lenses and fired beams from more than 500 yards away. That is nearly 17 times the range of existing non-lethal weapons, such as rubber bullets.
Anyone hit by the beam immediately jumped out of its path because of the sudden blast of heat throughout the body. While the 130-degree heat was not painful, it was intense enough to make the participants think their clothes were about to ignite.
“This is one of the key technologies for the future,” said Marine Col. Kirk Hymes, director of the non-lethal weapons program at Quantico, Va., which helped develop the new weapon. “Non-lethal weapons are important for the escalation of force, especially in the environments our forces are operating in.”
The system uses electromagnetic millimeter waves, which can penetrate only 1/64th of an inch of skin, just enough to cause discomfort. By comparison, microwaves used in the common kitchen appliance penetrate several inches of flesh.
The millimeter waves cannot go through walls, but they can penetrate most clothing, officials said. They refused to comment on whether the waves can go through glass.
The weapon could be mounted aboard ships, airplanes and helicopters, and routinely used for security or anti-terrorism operations.
“There should be no collateral damage to this,” said Senior Airman Adam Navin, 22, of Green Bay, Wis., who has served several tours in Iraq.
Navin and two other airmen were role players in Wednesday’s demonstration. They and 10 reporters who volunteered were shot with the beams. The beams easily penetrated various layers of winter clothing.
The system was developed by the military, but the two devices currently being evaluated were built by defense contractor Raytheon.
Airman Blaine Pernell, 22, of suburban New Orleans, said he could have used the system during his four tours in Iraq, where he manned watchtowers around a base near Kirkuk. He said Iraqis constantly pulled up and faked car problems so they could scout out U.S. forces.
“All we could do is watch them,” he said. But if they had the ray gun, troops “could have dispersed them.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)