"Although the VA isn’t too affected by government shutdowns (because so much of the agency’s workforce are medical caregivers who are deemed “essential”)"
I have a nurse friend (neo natal) who works in a military hospital in Temple, TX who is most definitely NOT getting paid. She is absolutely essential and has been working many more shifts so I'm not sure about your statement. But she is paid by DOD, not VA and so is not paid. A fine distinction of 'essential'.
Former Congressional caseworker here — I handled constituent services for a Member with a very veteran-heavy district and presence in Massachusetts. From that perspective, it is sometimes a double-edged sword that the VA Committees are so active: for both veterans and staff at the VA, the rate and volume of legislation means that the agency itself is a chaotic, conflicting hodgepodge of programs, restrictions, pots of funding, designated staff, modernization projects, etc., where nothing sunsets, nothing outdated is replaced, everything is always additive, because every program has a constituency and it's politically unforgiving to be seen as taking something away from veterans (I mean, fair!). Every Member on the VA committee wants to create a new program, and they have a good shot at doing so with the pace of those committees' work and relative bipartisan support for VA-related programs.
Working in the state capacity/Congressional capacity space now, I do think a lot about how we could work to cherrypick the best parts of the one-committee-one-agency model that DOES let legislation move fairly quickly, but coupled with more outcomes-driven approaches to legislating that might be a little bit less prone to creating statutory sediment.
Concerning the ACES Act, I might point out that cancer in all aircrews - military, commercial or private - is a known problem partially related to the "significant loss of atmospheric protection against cosmic radiation, leading to approximately 10 to 50 times more exposure than at sea level. The thinning atmosphere at high altitudes provides less shielding, which is why radiation levels are higher for passengers and crew, especially on longer flights or at higher latitudes (closer to the poles)."
As a submarine nuke, we always were told to to never take our dosimeters with us when flying because it would give us a radiation dose that was like 100x what we would get from working in the engine room next to the reactor and would screw with all of the radiation monitoring programs by giving a false positive
I'd like to bring your attention to the recent Washington Post series on Veteran's Disability Benefits. While they point out, probably correctly, that there is some graft in the program, and that a subset of Veterans are trying to 'game the system', it seems to me they went a little overboard. They failed, in my opinion, to point out that many (most?) of those receiving disability benefits are seriously sick, and that their service possibly (probably?) aggravated their condition.
What I'm hoping for is your methodical and unbiased reporting on this issue.
Here's how we can tell the anti-Schumer whining by the DSA and Bernie Bros is more a power play attempt and not based on the shutdown ending deal: the DSA Bros are attacking Hakeem Jeffries even though he is foursquare against the deal.
A deal, by the way, that's better than the whiners want to admit:
"Although the VA isn’t too affected by government shutdowns (because so much of the agency’s workforce are medical caregivers who are deemed “essential”)"
I have a nurse friend (neo natal) who works in a military hospital in Temple, TX who is most definitely NOT getting paid. She is absolutely essential and has been working many more shifts so I'm not sure about your statement. But she is paid by DOD, not VA and so is not paid. A fine distinction of 'essential'.
Former Congressional caseworker here — I handled constituent services for a Member with a very veteran-heavy district and presence in Massachusetts. From that perspective, it is sometimes a double-edged sword that the VA Committees are so active: for both veterans and staff at the VA, the rate and volume of legislation means that the agency itself is a chaotic, conflicting hodgepodge of programs, restrictions, pots of funding, designated staff, modernization projects, etc., where nothing sunsets, nothing outdated is replaced, everything is always additive, because every program has a constituency and it's politically unforgiving to be seen as taking something away from veterans (I mean, fair!). Every Member on the VA committee wants to create a new program, and they have a good shot at doing so with the pace of those committees' work and relative bipartisan support for VA-related programs.
Working in the state capacity/Congressional capacity space now, I do think a lot about how we could work to cherrypick the best parts of the one-committee-one-agency model that DOES let legislation move fairly quickly, but coupled with more outcomes-driven approaches to legislating that might be a little bit less prone to creating statutory sediment.
Very interesting! Thank you for sharing your perspective.
Concerning the ACES Act, I might point out that cancer in all aircrews - military, commercial or private - is a known problem partially related to the "significant loss of atmospheric protection against cosmic radiation, leading to approximately 10 to 50 times more exposure than at sea level. The thinning atmosphere at high altitudes provides less shielding, which is why radiation levels are higher for passengers and crew, especially on longer flights or at higher latitudes (closer to the poles)."
As a submarine nuke, we always were told to to never take our dosimeters with us when flying because it would give us a radiation dose that was like 100x what we would get from working in the engine room next to the reactor and would screw with all of the radiation monitoring programs by giving a false positive
Gabe, thanks so much.
I'd like to bring your attention to the recent Washington Post series on Veteran's Disability Benefits. While they point out, probably correctly, that there is some graft in the program, and that a subset of Veterans are trying to 'game the system', it seems to me they went a little overboard. They failed, in my opinion, to point out that many (most?) of those receiving disability benefits are seriously sick, and that their service possibly (probably?) aggravated their condition.
What I'm hoping for is your methodical and unbiased reporting on this issue.
Thank you Gabe. No amount of money and support for veterans is too much
Aloha. From the CVOCONUT WIRELESS... sTILL F88KIN'mad....KEEP calling them.............. Make it Clear where you Stand.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D–IL) (202) 224-2152
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D–NV) (202) 224-3542
Sen. John Fetterman (D–PA) (202) 224-4254
Sen. Tim Kaine (D–VA) (202) 224-4024
Sen. Angus King (I–ME) (202) 224-5344
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D–NV) (202) 224-6244
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D–NH) — (202) 224-3324
Thank you for this column. So appropriate to highlight on this day.
Wondering if project 25 will eventually get its way to privatize veterans healthcare, which most veterans Association oppose for obvious reasons
Here's how we can tell the anti-Schumer whining by the DSA and Bernie Bros is more a power play attempt and not based on the shutdown ending deal: the DSA Bros are attacking Hakeem Jeffries even though he is foursquare against the deal.
A deal, by the way, that's better than the whiners want to admit:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/shutdown-congress-republicans-democrats-deal-b2861825.html