RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,150689,00.html

Today's Washington Post Article on Walter Reed and the GAO's Report on a lack of progress, at Walter Reed and elsewhere, should come as no surprise. The various committees and commissions, some of which are still meeting and investigating, have all met their goals and objectives...OBFUSCATION of Military Health Care Issues! The Pentagon, Congress, and the Executive Branch all pay lip-service with no real desire to solve the long standing problems. Simply stated, the problem is a nut too hard to crack and way to expensive. Here comes another round of Congressional Hearings and more committee/commission appointments...That will really show Veterans and the Public that our Elected and Appointed Officials Care and Support our Troops.

I may be missing something but I don't know what "today's Washington Post" article is being referred to. All I see is another Paul Rieckhoff opinion piece.

What IS worth reading is the referenced GAO report. It is factual, informative, and reasoned. It, having read it, falls somewhere in between "everything is rosy" and "the sky is falling" with short-term fixes doing better for a number of reasons than long-term fixes.

The GAO report is here.

Rieckoff's opinion piece, in my view, is NOT the bottom line and those who truly care about this issue should take the time to read and assess it, bearing in mind that it is an interim report on a series of programs across multiple agencies and on numerous military bases in various stages of implementation. It is not about "Walter Reed".

I have to imagine Paul Rieckhoff is just trying to build a fire under the Walter Reed. If my memory serves, last year the hospital annex had a leak in the roof and soon developed into a media war against a very dedicated group of people looking after the wounded. It's strange, yesterday on the TV version military.com Robert Duval, the actor, toured the facility and was saying what great care our troops were receiving, with one added element, the loving care given by Walter Reed.

There's no money to fix it. It's all been sent to Haliburton, Blackwater, and to rebuild Iraq.

I thought Walter Reed was on the list to get closed, around 2011. The place is about 100 years old.

quote:

Originally posted by Jade_Gate:
I may be missing something but I don't know what "today's Washington Post" article is being referred to. All I see is another Paul Rieckhoff opinion piece.

What IS worth reading is the referenced GAO report. It is factual, informative, and reasoned. It, having read it, falls somewhere in between "everything is rosy" and "the sky is falling" with short-term fixes doing better for a number of reasons than long-term fixes.

The GAO report is here.

Rieckoff's opinion piece, in my view, is NOT the bottom line and those who truly care about this issue should take the time to read and assess it, bearing in mind that it is an interim report on a series of programs across multiple agencies and on numerous military bases in various stages of implementation. It is not about "Walter Reed".

This is "today's Washington Post report", if you are interested. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...AR2007092601600.html

One of the reasons that "long-term fixes" aren't doing well is that they aren't being implemented ... I suspect you have read the Dole-Shalala report, and there are a number of recommendations in it that do not require any action by Congress, but only Executive orders to implement ... and to date, none of them have been. I don't see how that can be sloughed off.

quote:

Originally posted by 1stSgtD0811:
I thought Walter Reed was on the list to get closed, around 2011. The place is about 100 years old.

WRAMC is on the BRAC list. The current hospital building is about 30 years old; the old hospital (now housing administrative offices) was built in 1909. The age of any facility does not necessarily have any bearing on the quality of care given, since that depends as much on human factors (policies, procedures, obstacles, enhancements) as on bricks, mortar and techno-wizardry.

This is precisely why I created the thread "KEEP THIS BUMPED ..." on the P/CP board - to keep people focused on the problem and solving it instead of burying it under mountains of investigative reports and study assessments.

As noted above conclusions - lots of them - have been reached and many recommendations made. I hope some of the members here who reflexively vote Republican because "they support the military" will remember this next year and check into the voting records of their local and state officials, those they may be sending or sending back to Congress, and the presidential candidates. Look at the record, not the party label. Oldmole's last statement speaks volumes.

As well I basically applaud anyone who tries to improve vets situation, my belief is that Paul Rieckhoff is only in here for Paul Rieckhoff, experienced myself he is unreliable.

A lurid article side by side with an ad for his book, and a smiley face for an ugly theme. Wondered many times in regards of his articles, what he smiles about. Can somebody fix this first, please ?

Amen Nike. I am a former patient at Walter Reed. It is not part of the VA hospital system. The media confused that.

The one thing that needs to be remembered is that fixing the problems doesn't occur overnight. As was stated earlier, you've got multiple agencies involved and multiple military installations involved. Changes are being implemented, though maybe not quickly enough to suit everyone. I'm all for improving healthcare for our Troops and Veterans, but realistic enough to know that such major changes take more time than 7 months.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Originally posted by Jade_Gate:
I may be missing something but I don't know what "today's Washington Post" article is being referred to. All I see is another Paul Rieckhoff opinion piece.

What IS worth reading is the referenced GAO report. It is factual, informative, and reasoned. It, having read it, falls somewhere in between "everything is rosy" and "the sky is falling" with short-term fixes doing better for a number of reasons than long-term fixes.

The GAO report is here.

Rieckoff's opinion piece, in my view, is NOT the bottom line and those who truly care about this issue should take the time to read and assess it, bearing in mind that it is an interim report on a series of programs across multiple agencies and on numerous military bases in various stages of implementation. It is not about "Walter Reed".

This is "today's Washington Post report", if you are interested. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...AR2007092601600.html

One of the reasons that "long-term fixes" aren't doing well is that they aren't being implemented ... I suspect you have read the Dole-Shalala report, and there are a number of recommendations in it that do not require any action by Congress, but only Executive orders to implement ... and to date, none of them have been. I don't see how that can be sloughed off.

Thank you for the WaPo article. It is a little more substantive than the Rieckhoff piece. The Dole-Shalala report is pretty good, in my view but there is pending Congressional action that may skew how some of its findings are implemented. I can understand not starting down one path when a significant risk of having to backtrack and take another path is present. At the same time, I am encouraged that both the administration and Congress (as well as, specifically, the DoD and VA) are taking a very hard look at how to restructure the disability review/award process. While my preferred solution is not one of the ones being considered, I am hopeful that a process will emerge that gives a fair and timely shake to the soldier in the long term. I do not find puff opinion pieces such as Rieckhoff's helpful and they may even be counter-productive.

Mr. Rieckhoff, heres to PIE IN YOUR FACE!!!!!

Why spend untold millions on a hospital that is going to be closed and done away with in just less than THREE YEARS? Methinks you had nothing else to do but start some trouble among those that pay no attention to current events unless it is something to gripe about or some drugged out, dumb butt pro athlete, or another of the druggie, drunken, ****ty culture in Hollywood.
The government is already spending 10+ million to revamp the orthopedic division of Walter Reed and then it will be destroyed when WR closes by Federal Mandate and everything is moved to Bethesda. Maybe you like the idea of wasting our hard earned tax dollars even more than those self serving bas*&^%$ in "El Districto De Criminales" (Wash. D.C.), but I for one, work far too hard to allow, or give them cause to waste another billion or two on a DEAD VENUE.

We veterans have ALWAYS been screwed over and had to make do with "leavings", why not just buck up and make do with what we have now and use the waste of redo on WR in updating and making Bethesda even better for the future. The way the current race is going with the ****s we have to choose from and the world arena going to hell in a hand basket, we will need more and better at Bethesda for the care of more wounded troops than your simple mind can begin to fathom

Between now and the time any new facility at Bethesda opens up (and not a shovelful of dirt has been turned, so you know damned well there won't be any new facility there in three years), Mr. Gilmour, where exactly are the wounded supposed to be treated? Bethesda isn't big enough, nor does it have the facilities. Brooke has facilities, especially for prosthetics and burns, but can't take all the casualties. You do realize that there have been over 30,000 WIAs, and a significant percentage of them have been through WRAMC.

So ... just farm them out to civilian hospitals where they'll get booted out the door 48 hours after surgery, like mastectomy patients? I'll see your begrudged tax dollars going to WRAMC and double them. Your indignation is misplaced and you are preaching false economy at the expense of those wounded.