Veterans. What Are They Entitled To?

Congress should stop treating veterans like they're asking for a hand out when it comes to the benefits they were promised, and they should realize that, were it not for these veterans, there would be nothing to hand out.

 Congressman Nick Lampson (R-TX)


This is what arrived in my Inbox a few days ago:

Case # 7658: SM (that’s Service Member, in case you didn’t know) filed a VA claim for service connected PTSD ( that’s Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) on November 17, 2010 just beyond the 24 months per SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) policy for consideration…. SM became homeless (emphasis added) in October 2010 and was forced to live out of her car while her 12 year old daughter resided with friends that lived close to her school…. once all the required documentation is submitted to HUD, it may take up to two (2) months to process the case completely…. landlord requires SM pay, security deposit, first and last month’s rent immediately.

SM requested just over $5900 for first and last month rent, food and other expenses. What would you do?

On July 28, 1932, U.S. Army troops commanded by General Douglas MacArthur attacked WW I veterans marching on the U.S. Capitol demanding payment of veterans benefits promised to them by the World War Adjusted Compensation Act of 1924. Believing they were communists and criminals, the General ordered infantry and the Third Cavalry Regiment (led by Major George S. Patton) to attack the marchers. Fifty-five veterans were injured and 135 arrested.

Well, I guess things aren’t that bad for veterans. Are they? Here’s another one:

Case # 9051: SM participated in the OIF (Operation Iraqi Freedom) campaign from May 1, 2003 to April 23, 2004. SM was discharged as an Army National Guard reservist on August 26, 2010 and was subsequently admitted to a Rehabilitation Program at the Miami VA Hospital [for PTSD]….. SM states he did not want to admit that he had this and this is why he waited 3+ years to seek treatment.

I am not making this up. These are real cases of SM’s who have submitted claims to Operation Homefront, a non-profit that provides assistance to wounded warriors, combat veterans and their families. In a strange twist on Joseph Heller’s novel of WW II, Catch-22, one can get help from the VA for PTSD but is discouraged by a culture of denial to apply.

SM has applied to VA to increase his PTSD rating. He requests assistance to avoid eviction….

The Serviceman’s Readjustment Act, or GI Bill, was passed in 1944 to provide veterans with educational opportunities after the war. Most soldiers and sailors who served went straight from high school to boot camp and received little or no vocational training. As such they were trained to be soldiers but had few skills required in a manufacturing or service-oriented workforce.

President Barack Obama appointed retired General Eric Shinseki to head the Veterans’ Administration at the beginning of his term. In August of 2009, he liberalized rules used by the VA to diagnose and treat PTSD saying, “The hidden wounds of war are being addressed vigorously and comprehensively by this administration as we move VA forward in its transformation to the 21st century”.

SM returned from deployment with a mild case of TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) has been unemployed for eight months……

Unlike previous wars, including the war in Vietnam, our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are exposed to danger constantly with little opportunity for rest. Operation Homefront provided assistance to over 160,000 veterans and their families in each of the last two years. The cases ranged from dysfunction related to PTSD to debilitating wounds that prevented veterans from finding work to veterans and their families becoming homeless.

SM is E4 Army veteran, infantry who served 7 years with Army with 2 tours with OIF. SM was honorably discharged April 6, 2007 ….. SM displayed PTSD symptoms after return from second tour in Iraq, and these symptoms increased after his discharge.…. SM was incarcerated in November 2008 when he fired “warning shots” at an aggressive driver from his gun in his car.

I am delighted that Secretary Shinseki has embarked on a program to increase the numbers of service members who would be eligible for treatment for PTSD. However, in my role on Op Homefront’s Florida board, I am exposed to the extent to which the VA and the services themselves are guilty of not helping discharged veterans to successfully transition back to civilian life.

This is not an attack on the Armed Services or the Veterans’ Administration. There are laws governing what they can and can’t do. The laws are converted to regulations and the people who deal with these cases are legally bound to follow the rules. Any set of rules will create exceptional cases and many of them will be egregious.

I think the larger question is: are we, as a society, ready to deal with the aftermath of our dual combat missions? The amputees? The psychologically impaired? The family problems?

There are ancillary questions as well. How do we evaluate these cases to ensure people are getting the help they need? What is the responsibility of government to help them? How will we expand the existing entitlement programs to encompass this new population?

Or to say it differently, WHO WILL LEAD?

Rules? What Rules?

"My, we seem to be a little short on brotherly love round here." 

-- Butch Cassidy, as played by Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

I got into a Facebook Fight last week. Have you ever been in one? It's kind of like that scene from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. You know the one where Butch has to get into a knife fight with a really big, scary guy. He asks him, "What are the rules?" Big Scary Guy replies: "Rules? In a knife fight? No rules!"  He no sooner gets the words out of his mouth than Butch kicks him in the groin. Well, there are no rules in a Facebook Fight either.

I use different internet tools for different purposes. LinkedIn for business; Facebook for personal stuff, pictures and messages to friends and family, etc. So, when I woke up at my usual 5 AM to a posting on my Facebook wall supporting the Wisconsin 14, I went off the deep end. Last year, I had de-friended members of my own family for posting their support of the Arizona immigration law. So, why am I waking up to some commie crap on my damn wall? By a so-called friend no less.

Now, 5 AM is not my best time of day. I could have deleted it. I could have blocked the friend from posting on my wall. I could have de-friended him. But, no-o-o-o! I responded aggressively.

My opponent was a very well read Ph.D. And worse, he was abetted by an old high school chum of mine with whom I haven’t spoken since graduation day. In fact, I am not sure I even spoke to him then. Two against one. That’s not fair! Oh yeah, there are no rules in a Facebook Fight. My H.S. buddy is a school psychologist according to his Facebook page. So, he is right there with the Ph.D.

Ph.D. hits me with Robert Reich. I parry with Freidrich Hayek. He’s never heard of him. Hah! Take that, Ph.D.

I am a fan of NY Times columnist, David Brooks. I never miss a column. He mostly writes about political and policy issues and represents a moderate voice that does not adhere to any political dogma. I guess that’s why I like him. His new book is called The Social Animal. I understand from the reviews and summaries that it is a fictional representation of the ways in which we form relationships and connect ourselves to ideas and social norms. Though not an expert on brain science, Brooks has written of our new understanding of it and how it has affected us. Think of all those bright business school grads on Wall Street and how they self destructed during the financial crisis of 2008/09.

So, here I am parrying the thrusts and jabs of my formidable opposition and it occurs to me that Brooks is right about all this. I am fairly well read myself and yet could not convince either of these guys of the wisdom of my thinking any more than they could convince me of theirs. It’s not that their thinking was irrational. Indeed, their thoughts might be considered to be a rationalization of their beliefs.

All their reading and learning had been directed to support their values and biases. So, were mine. There was no winning this Facebook Fight for any of us. No way, no how.

Isn’t that what’s happening across the nation? Don’t you get emails from your friends and colleagues that either reinforce your views or infuriate you? So, how can we solve the big national problems when we are all so enamored of what’s going on in our own heads that we can’t compromise?

A recent speech by Republican Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana to the Conservative Political Action Committee provides some insight on how we might answer that question. He counsels his right wing followers to put everything on the table including tax increases and defense spending to resolve the problem of our deficits and debt.

He reminds his followers that “big change requires big majorities” and that we will “need people who never listen to Rush or Glenn or Laura or Sean”. He also reminds us that the founders “made compacts and concessions and, yes, compromises” in the cause of creating one union from the 13 colonies who won their freedom from the British crown.

NPR called it a Grown Up brand of GOP politics. We need that from both sides of the aisle. A recent report from economist John Mauldin found that a “majority of voters incorrectly believes the federal government spends more on defense/foreign aid than it does on Medicare and Social Security (63%). Also, a similar majority (60%) incorrectly believes problems with the federal budget can be fixed by just eliminating waste, fraud and abuse.”

The President created his own version of Grown Up politics with the Simpson Bowles Commission aimed at resolving our national debt. Their controversial proposal is dying a slow death like those of most Presidential commissions.

Our debt problem is serious and addressing it will be painful. What is called for is the equivalent of Ronald Reagan’s dollar bill speech in 1981. He held up a dollar bill and opened with “This is a dollar bill…..”

We guffawed about it the following day on the trading floor at Goldman Sachs. But, that’s the kind of communication that is called for now. Reagan explained to voters how every dollar they earn is divided up. The equivalent of a PowerPoint pie chart.

The pie chart needs to be updated. If nothing changes, every dollar of tax revenue will go to paying interest on the national debt within 10 years. Nothing left for national defense. Nothing left for social programs. Nothing.

The only question is: WHO WILL LEAD?

The Disunion of 'Dis Union

The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise -- with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disentrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.

                                                               ---  Abraham Lincoln


It’s hard to imagine that President Grover Cleveland ordered the US Marshalls and the National Guard to put down an insurrection in this country. The year was 1894 and the insurrectionists were members of the American Railway Union. The troops killed 34 union members and wounded 57. The leader of the ARU, Eugene Debs, was arrested, convicted of violating a federal court order and was imprisoned for six months.

Trade unions have been around for a long time but it was the labor movement of the 1930’s that forged the cultural institutions that survive today vexing corporate executives and state governors alike. Laws signed by Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt gave impetus to larger unions banding together to bargain with employers. It was a period in which attacks against striking workers by US troops and hired thugs gradually came to an end. But, the unions were poorly run and infused with Communists. During the depression, with unemployment at 25% and workers unable to pay dues, they were not very effective.

After WWII, Walter Reuther became head of the UAW, purged Communists from their management to become well administered and powerful negotiators. He set an example for his peers to follow. The booming economy of the time coupled with higher wages and benefits created a middle class economy throughout the Midwest and northeastern US underpinned by union workers.

By the 1970’s, the impact of a new, more global economy called for a paradigm shift. The impetus for that shift was provided by Ronald Reagan who famously disemboweled PATCO, the air traffic controllers union. I think he did it to set a precedent and prove to industrial leaders that they could too.

But, ultimately, it was the market not politics that undid the union. Union wages and benefits added costs to the manufacture of finished goods that made US industry uncompetitive on a global scale. Foreign auto manufacturers seeking to neutralize the impact of volatility of the dollar built their US auto plants in the South where they were less likely to unionize.

I won't go through the history of unions for the past thirty years.  Nor will I reiterate the issues that are well covered in the news of late.  If you have read this far, you probably already know and have an opinion.  Instead, I would like to pose a business question. 

Union membership has declined precipitously. In 1950, 25% of American workers belonged to a union. Today, the percentage is half that. And, tellingly the percentage among employees of private companies is 7.5% while over 36% of public employees are union members.

Now, if a business had seen such a precipitously decline in its fortunes, it would have to transform itself or face liquidation.  Instead, unions have resisted change.  The unions won’t win this war. They might win a battle or two but I am here to tell you that their day is done. The model doesn’t work anymore.

What should they do? Give up? Close up shop? NO! They should transform themselves into 21st Century institutions. Why would anyone think that the 19th Century model honed to perfection 60 years ago will work now?

Unions should be transformed into Centers for Human Capital Development. Instead of an entrenched interest that fights progress; they should be training people for 21st century jobs. Manufacturing has become more high tech. Math and science skills are lacking.  Last year, the NY Times reported that a factory in Cleveland had over 3600 applicants for jobs to run a high tech machine used in fabrication.  Each applicant was tested to see if their math skills were at the ninth grade level.  The company was unable to fill the 100 job openings in a city that has lost over a million manufacturing jobs in the last decade.

If a manufacturing company could come to the union to find workers trained to work in this new environment, they would see a union contract as beneficial to their business rather than an obstacle to be overcome. This new model would work for public employees as well – including teachers.

If unions offered benefits – healthcare, 401K’s – to their members in addition to training matched to employers’ needs, they would find membership an attractive value proposition.  It would take the burden off the employers who contracted with them. 

If unions were to follow this model, everyone would be a winner: the employers, the employees and the unions.

But, entrenched interests have over a century of momentum. Quoting Lincoln again, “As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disentrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.”

The only question is WHO WILL LEAD?