The politics and the realities of the VA scandal

#51
#51
lawgator1 said:
The budget is objective. I wish I knew more about what is meant by "Wait Time in Days for Care." I don't think it takes a year to get in for just a checkup. I know there are delays. I wonder if that refers to a particular type of appointment?
Click to expand...

No, that's more than likely the accurate time frame.
 
#52
#52
Grand Vol said:
No, that's more than likely the accurate time frame.
Click to expand...


Even the scandal ones says it was taking these acutely ill guys weeks to get in whereas the goal is 14 days. So 360 days seems like it must be talking about some particular thing, rather than generally getting an appointment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#53
#53
lawgator1 said:
Even the scandal ones says it was taking these acutely ill guys weeks to get in whereas the goal is 14 days. So 360 days seems like it must be talking about some particular thing, rather than generally getting an appointment.
Click to expand...

You do understand I happen to know a little about this particular area being that I'm retired and use the VA?

Trust me, that 14 day goal rode off with the unicorn over the rainbow in search of the pot of gold. They may contact you within 14 days, but the appointment times are nowhere near close to that number.
 
#54
#54
July 2013: In an e-mail exchange among employees at the Carl T. Hayden VA Medical Center in Phoenix, an employee questions whether administrators are improperly touting their Wildly Important Goals program. "I think it's unfair to call any of this a success when veterans are waiting six weeks on an electronic waiting list before they're called to schedule their first PCP (primary-care provider) appointment," program analyst Damian Reese complains.
Timeline: The story behind the VA scandal

Waiting 6 weeks just to get a call to schedule their first appointment?
 
#55
#55
Grand Vol said:
You do understand I happen to know a little about this particular area being that I'm retired and use the VA?

Trust me, that 14 day goal rode off with the unicorn over the rainbow in search of the pot of gold. They may contact you within 14 days, but the appointment times are nowhere near close to that number.
Click to expand...


I know and that is unacceptable. I saw one study a little bit ago that said they are only hitting that mark in 41 % of the cases.

My point was simply that I don't think the average is 360 days. That number seems to me like it must be referring to something specific rather than the general wait times to get in.

Even the other years mentioned it was at least 4 months, so again I'm just asking what specifically that was referring to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#56
#56
lawgator1 said:
I know and that is unacceptable. I saw one study a little bit ago that said they are only hitting that mark in 41 % of the cases.

My point was simply that I don't think the average is 360 days. That number seems to me like it must be referring to something specific rather than the general wait times to get in.

Even the other years mentioned it was at least 4 months, so again I'm just asking what specifically that was referring to.
Click to expand...

Over 20 million veterans in the US right now. And how many hospitals and clinics are there?
 
#58
#58
utvolpj said:
he's been there for 5 years, knew about the issues and even addressed them as candidate Obama. He then brushed it aside like all campaign promises
he needs to make a public spectacle of firing some of the incompetent people he has working with the VA (starting with Shinseki). He then needs to find someone who is invested in the process and has a track record of getting results and tell them to get to fixing it and report back once a week. Of course that requires leadership and that's not Obama's strength
Click to expand...

Exactly. We were told he was different.
 
#59
#59
lawgator1 said:
Dunno. Quick Google search of that question did not give me an answer.
Click to expand...

Supposedly 1700 hospitals, clinics, in care facilities, shelters and other facilities to include cemeteries (131 of those). That's almost 13,000 patients per facility even if they all did some sort of medical procedures (and obviously not all do). So that number will probably be higher per facility.
 
#61
#61
Grand Vol said:
Supposedly 1700 hospitals, clinics, in care facilities, shelters and other facilities to include cemeteries (131 of those). That's almost 13,000 patients per facility even if they all did some sort of medical procedures (and obviously not all do). So that number will probably be higher per facility.
Click to expand...

I'm a veteran, but I don't use the VA system. I don't have any of the issues associated with Gulf War Syndrome and I wasn't in the National Guard long enough (13 years) to qualify for Tri-Care.

I'd say that there are a lot out there like me, veterans who don't have or don't want access to the VA.
 
#62
#62
MG1968 said:
I'm a veteran, but I don't use the VA system. I don't have any of the issues associated with Gulf War Syndrome and I wasn't in the National Guard long enough (13 years) to qualify for Tri-Care.

I'd say that there are a lot out there like me, veterans who don't have or don't want access to the VA.
Click to expand...

As long as it's service related, you can be seen. And that's regardless of active, reserve or guard.

Point being is the enrollment numbers are way up in the VA. And they were truly unprepared for the numbers they have.
 
#63
#63
Grand Vol said:
As long as it's service related, you can be seen. And that's regardless of active, reserve or guard.

Point being is the enrollment numbers are way up in the VA. And they were truly unprepared for the numbers they have.
Click to expand...

This


I will use the VA if its anything concerning my service-connected injuries. Outside of those, I will use my BCBS
 
#64
#64
Grand Vol said:
As long as it's service related, you can be seen. And that's regardless of active, reserve or guard.

Point being is the enrollment numbers are way up in the VA. And they were truly unprepared for the numbers they have.
Click to expand...

I know. I'm just saying that I don't have any medical issues resulting from my service, therefore I don't have access.
 
#65
#65
Grand Vol said:
As long as it's service related, you can be seen. And that's regardless of active, reserve or guard.

Point being is the enrollment numbers are way up in the VA. And they were truly unprepared for the numbers they have.
Click to expand...

Off topic a bit but:

I tore up my knee while I was in, it's now starting to give me some trouble can I or how would I go about using the VA? It's been over 20 years.
 
#66
#66
hog88 said:
Off topic a bit but:

I tore up my knee while I was in, it's now starting to give me some trouble can I or how would I go about using the VA? It's been over 20 years.
Click to expand...

FIL had same issue. They gave him a new knee. This was through tricare. After a certain age he was kicked from tricare and is now on Medicare.
 
#67
#67
Grand Vol said:
As long as it's service related, you can be seen. And that's regardless of active, reserve or guard.

Point being is the enrollment numbers are way up in the VA. And they were truly unprepared for the numbers they have.
Click to expand...


That is surely true, but that would be the fault of both the POTUS and of Congress, not just POTUS.

While as I reiterate once again his handling of the public outcry on this is terrible, I guess I just resent the effort to make it look like its his fault on the front end. I think that is really reaching and rings hollow given the history of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#68
#68
hog88 said:
Off topic a bit but:

I tore up my knee while I was in, it's now starting to give me some trouble can I or how would I go about using the VA? It's been over 20 years.
Click to expand...

As long as its in your service medical records, just call the VA. Shouldn't be a problem.
 
#70
#70
lawgator1 said:
That is surely true, but that would be the fault of both the POTUS and of Congress, not just POTUS.

While as I reiterate once again his handling of the public outcry on this is terrible, I guess I just resent the effort to make it look like its his fault on the front end. I think that is really reaching and rings hollow given the history of the problem.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone will argue with you. Having said that to say this...

The problem has been out there long enough boiling in the background. And was ignored. And ignored. And now is past time to be proactive in this situation that could have/should have been done after his speeches as a Senator. He's in reactive mode and as you said, his handling of the situation is abysmal. This was something that very well could have been addressed as his campaign promised in 2008. But sadly, was like many other things he promised.
 
#71
#71
davethevol said:
When the guy attacked president Bush for the way the hospitals were being run and then claimed he would take care of the vets and make sure they got the care they needed, then it does matter who is in the White House.[/
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#72
#72
I'm not sure I know anything about this particular Representative, but holy cow, passionate

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dUf4S1_xQE[/youtube]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#74
#74
lawgator1 said:
That is surely true, but that would be the fault of both the POTUS and of Congress, not just POTUS.

While as I reiterate once again his handling of the public outcry on this is terrible, I guess I just resent the effort to make it look like its his fault on the front end. I think that is really reaching and rings hollow given the history of the problem.
Click to expand...

Is it not his fault if he knew (or his administrators) knew about the problem for 5 years and failed to do anything about it? Congress isn't in charge of the VA - the Executive Branch is.

It's more than bad handling of the public outcry - it is mismanagement from the outset AND spinning to the point of lying about it.

Congress sucks and has it's own problems but to say this as much their fault just doesn't reflect the realities of the situation.

Did the administration put forward a plan to fix this that Congress rejected or failed to fund?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#75
#75
lawgator1 said:
Ok.

Hey, I'm open to the possibility, even probability, that the raw numbers of everything are up because of the end of the Iraq war and the efforts in Afghanistan.

I realize some would spin that as the fault of the administration, but I think the core problems have been around for quite some time.

Again, I'd like to see a much more energized approach to the problem by Obama.
Click to expand...

C'mon man, he sent one of his aides to look into the problem, what more could he do? It isn't like he could form a special commission, maybe appoint a retired 4 star to lead it and get to the bottom of all this. That would be unheard of.*










*at least in the current administration.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top