“A few documented widows into VA Tyranny”

Thanks to  7^th Marine Phil Cushman

http://www.vdpi.org/

 These examples clearly show that our congress is aware of the situation and does nothing to protect the Veterans from government/VA abuse.

As you read through these individual discrete issues think about how this applies to the overall generic philosophy of the VA directed by the President(s) in our toxic chemical legacy and the Gulf War Issues.

During the past 50 years, the United States Congress, in order to create the appearance that it cared about the incessant and continuing rape of America’s military injured defenders, conducted numerous hearings, which documented that abuse, but resulted in no meaningful reform to date.  The VA “Iron Triangle” had absolute control over the fate of veterans, and any such reform would not be permitted by those with the power to manipulate the Congress.  A careful review of such hearing records reveals that every now and then, a courageous witness would testify before a U.S. Senate or House Committee, and therein reveal the truth about the evil going on in the VA system. 

Such testimony is often analogous to a window being opened up into the VA system, momentarily - - but clearly - - revealing the primarily budgetary based but greed driven tyranny (government operating without regard to established law). 

Such windows are immediately slammed shut by the VA system/government, which permits the perfidious betrayal to continue.  The following excerpts from Congressional hearing records, provide a view through such WINDOWS into the decades of VA tyranny, which continues to date:

WINDOW #1:

U.S. Senate, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, testimony[1][1]

by Dr. Alcide D. Pellerin, VA recognized “Outstanding Physician,” and medical member

of the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) in Washington, DC:

“I dissented {with his BVA panel}, but eventually gave in under duress as in many other cases.  Frank {the involved veteran then being violated by VA}, wherever you are, please forgive me for having taken part in robbing you of $40,000 or $50,000 in due benefits.  Two things stand out like sore thumbs in this case.  One, the arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the law; two, the abuse of power by the chairman of the BVA in dictating and imposing his will on board members.  Since the BVA is the last word, the veteran has to grin and bear, and regret that he hadn’t defected or deserted. 

During the next few minutes, I would like to give you examples of some of the dirty tricks used by some VA personnel to achieve the VA objective of denying claims. 

One is a case; a diagnosis of “athlete’s foot” was made during an official exam.  That was not to the liking of the reviewing chief who, I assume, wanted to serve his master well and at the same time feather his bed.  So he eradicated the diagnosis and created his very own diagnosis:  “athlete’s foot not found.”  The denial of the claim was sustained by the BVA.  This, I can assure you, would never be allowed to happen in a court of law.  

Two, in getting an independent medical expert opinion, the BVA typically utilizes a medical school staff member who is also on the staff of the VA hospital associated with the medical school, who is on some sort of a salary by the VA, and who according to my research had been a regular VA employee for several years at some time or other in the past.  This “setup” inevitably constitutes conflict of interest, yet the medical expert’s word is on “a par” with the divine word of God.  In contrast, should the veteran submit an opinion from a board certified specialist, say from some institution like the Mayo or Lahey Clinic, the Arthritis Foundation or the Georgetown Medical Center, that opinion only serves to reopen his case, and is considered as trash by the VA. 

In summary, the basic problem is one of uncontrolled, unchecked, uncorrectable injustice to the veteran because of the dictatorial power of the BVA.  This runs counter to our great American ideal of democracy, which abhors and denounces dictatorship, and to the Constitution, which guarantees justice in a court of law for every citizen. 

Please, gentlemen, I beg you, make it possible for the veteran to get justice, and the only possible way to accomplish this is not in the VA kangaroo courts, but in the Federal courts, which should be open to the veteran, and to the nonveteran . . . “   {Emphasis added}”

WINDOW #2:

U.S. Senate, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, hearing record[2][2] by Norman J. Johnson,

Staff Legal Advisor to the Board of Veterans Appeals in Washington, DC:

“I was a ‘staff legal advisor’ to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals for nine months in 1971-72.  The staff legal advisors” are the attorneys who actually write the Board’s decisions, subject to review and ultimate approval of an appellate panel of two lawyers and one physician.  I had previously practiced law for two years and the first thing I had to learn at the B.V.A. was to shelve my notions of professional objectivity and procedural due process.

Early on, I learned that there was a covert quota system in effect.  Job performances of staff attorneys were rated by the number of decisions written in a given week.  The fact of this quota system was always denied by the panel members and the front office; it was a well-known fact to the staff attorneys.

One was expected to produce a minimum of six decisions a week and I was once cautioned by a panel member not to exceed one dozen per week so as not to drive up management expectations.  I cannot believe that justice is accorded its due when the decision process is managed in such a way.

On questions of permanent and total disability claims, my section was very tight.  Where the facts were close, the decision always went against the veteran, although the statutes mandate a liberal interpretation.  In one particular case, I took an advocate’s position because I was convinced on the merits of the veteran’s disability claim.  I urged consideration of the fact that the Social Security Administration had made a determination of disability.  One of the section members dismissed that argument with the comment, “Those liberal bastards would give away the treasury.”  (My own previous experience with Social Security disability claims had led me to the opposite conclusion.). . . “  {Emphasis added}”

WINDOW #3:

U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, testimony[3][3]

by Donald H. Schwab, Director, National Legislative Service,

Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States:

“ . . . . .

4.  Many service officers are increasingly disappointed in the denial of cases, which they believe, have considerable merit.  Also, they wonder why over the past eight years, the percentage of cases allowed by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals has fluctuated only a little over two percent whether that body considered 25,000 cases in the year or more than 35,000 cases.  The average allowances have been 12.8% of cases considered.  In the last four fiscal years the variance has been only two tenths of one percent in that allowances in 1976, 1977 and 1979 were 12.7% and in 1978 12.5%.“ {Emphasis added}

The VFW/Mr. Schwab, thereby focused the attention of the Congressional Committee directly on the VA’s illegal budgetary driven quota system of justice for veterans, as verified in the VA’s own “Appeals Statistical Data” which appears above at page 9. 

WINDOW #4:

U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, testimony[4][4]

by Kenneth T. Blaylock, National President, American Federation

of Government Employees (AFGE):

" . . . Within the Veterans Administration itself, AFGE holds some 248 exclusive units of recognition representing nearly 116,000 personnel, including personnel in the Board of Veterans Appeals in the VA central office in Washington, D.C. . .  Yet, we must also observe that among our membership considerable dissatisfaction exists concerning the lack of access to the courts on the part of veterans who wish to appeal final determinations concerning benefit and disability decisions made by the Veterans Administration. 

In effect, under current law, veterans have been relegated to the status of second-class citizens who are denied the same rights of judicial review available to most other beneficiaries of federal entitlement programs. In this regard, we note that a demonstrated need exists for the Veterans Administration to be subject to judicial accountability.  We have seen figures, which clearly indicate that the veteran making an appeal to the Bureau of Veterans Affairs (BVA) is under a serious disadvantage. 

Whereas appeals to the Social Security Administration are decided in favor of the claimant in two out of three cases, actual results support or favor the veteran’s claims in the BVA in only one out of ten cases. .  In the absence of court review, there is no effective institutional check on arbitrary or impermissible action . . .

The Office of Management and Budget has brought substantial pressure against government agencies to control outlays, and such pressure can easily translate into tougher guidelines and policies concerning various entitlement and spending programs, particularly when such policies are not subject to any outside review . . . “    {emphasis added} 

NOTHING HAS CHANGED AT THE VA

In addition to Blaylock's statements of comparison between the Social Security and the VA systems bear in mind that the social security has no congressionally directed giving the claimant the benefit of the doubt.  Obviously this is just a "congressional ruse" to get your votes.  In fact they do nothing but let the injustice continue.

Maybe we should send letters to our congressman and senators that we know they are aware of this situation and are doing nothing and it is time they did or get out of DC; and then make that happen state by state.