Why Walter Reed is Actually Important
By Chad A. B. Wilson
Published March 7, 2007, 12:16 pm in Military / Foreign policy, Ethics, Morality, & Justice, Economic Issues.
It's tragic. It's unforgivable. But it's also understandable.
I'm not defending what happened at Walter Reed, mind you. It is tragic, and it is unforgivable. But it really does come as no surprise. I get pretty good care from my doctors, and I am able to go into any emergency room and get the care that I need. I'm thankful for that. My doctors do not neglect me, and I can't imagine some of the conditions that we have put these wounded soldiers through. I mean that: I cannot imagine what they have been through.
But this is really just a sign of a bloated bureaucracy that can no longer function correctly. We see it on a small scale in all types of healthcare--billing procedures that change daily, rooms incorrectly listed in hospital databases, confusing parking and hospital floor plans. Each time I take one of my children to the doctor, for example, I end up getting at least three bills afterward. For a while there, they were charging three times my co pay, telling me that I had a deductible that had not been met. When I finally got around to checking it, my HMO told me that I did not have a deductible, and I should never pay more than the stated co pay. And I have no idea what the bills I get are actually for because nothing is itemized.
Working with the current healthcare system is terrible. We all know that.
But it's nothing like what these wounded soldiers have been through. These are soldiers who were wounded fighting for us. Whether we agree with the war in Iraq or not is beside the point. These soldiers still put their lives on the line because our government told them to. Therefore, they are fighting to protect us. I respect that, and I praise them for their sacrifice. And then, when they get wounded, to treat them this way, to make them confront a bureaucracy that treats them worse than my HMO treats me, well, that's just mean. And to neglect them in some instances. And to make them put up with this kind of treatment because they have no where else to go. That I can't stomach, and it makes me furious writing this.
But it would be just another scandal of neglect, if it weren't for the war in Iraq.
The War is Overrun
That's the main point of it. This scandal reveals something deeper about how the war in Iraq is ruining our military system. According to the National Priorities Project, the Iraq war has cost over $406 billion. It's hard to find actual data for this, and it depends whether you consider both Iraq and Afghanistan, and whether the normal defense budget is factored in, as well. And it depends which site you go to, too. The administration is not keen on publishing the numbers because, well, they're ridiculous! But that leaves us with the war protesters' figures, and we have to take their numbers with a grain of salt. Don't trust a war protestor to tell you the truth about something regarding the war because his or her view is skewed. Just like I wouldn't trust someone who thought the war was great. Anyway, let's assume the $406 billion figure is correct. Why? Because there is no other surefire way to know.
And the point isn't the figure itself. The point is that the special supplements to pay for Iraq are not the only money that goes to the effort. The normal military budget has to be factored in there, as well, and that budget has to also be used to pay for things such as Walter Reed Army Medical Center. That's the point.
Why does it matter? Because they're all saying that they are understaffed and under trained, that's the generals are admitting. In other words, the medical center where this neglect and bureaucratic crap occurred at the expense of our wounded soldiers was caused by a lack of money. Money to pay for staff members. Money to train those members. Money to pay for better facilities. Money to pay for cleaning mold off the walls. Why don't the have the money to get good people and train them and maybe even keep them for a few years
?Because it's all going to fight this cursed war.
I'm not saying that the money all comes out of the same budget because as hard as I try, I can't find a straight answer on that. I'm not an economist, and I'm not really qualified to talk about the budget. But I do know this: go far enough to the top, and all federal money eventually comes out of the same coffer.
That's why, when you look at the National Priorities Project, you can find out how many teachers could have been hired with the money spent on Iraq. Or how many housing units could have been built. Or how many children could have adequate healthcare. Sure, they're different systems, and the budget is set up so that money for defense isn't spent on building HUD homes. But it's also true that the defense budget could have been cut and the money put elsewhere.
Here is what I'm not saying: I'm not saying pull out of Iraq to start nationalized healthcare. No way. But sheesh, stop spending quite so much to put more soldiers in danger in Iraq and take care of the ones you already sent over there who got shot in the face! Spend a few million dollars more to take care of these people who are fighting to protect us instead of spending gobs of money to send more and more troops over there to have the same things happen to them. The same argument could be said about any other government program that is floundering, but I think it makes sense to consider army medical centers a part of the special appropriations, not to mention the defense budget. So rearrange some of the money so that we take good care of the people who got hurt trying to protect us.
What this scandal points out is the mismanagement of the war. The priorities are so "political" that we basically have to win the war at all costs. If we lose this war, the GOP is hurting. They're practically out of the game already. If we lose or we keep in it and it goes on forever, the GOP doesn't have a chance. But if we win, then they were right. That's what Bush has said all along: history will praise him. In hindsight, we will know that it was the right decision. And heck, it might be. But right now, it doesn't look like it. But with all of the focus on winning the war, it's almost as if we don't care about the people who went over but can no longer help us win. Those wounded soldiers, well, they're longer any good to us because they're shot. They're hurt. They can't go back and fight and help us win. That's what this scandal seems to be saying. And what I'm saying is change the priorities. Get the wounded the help they need and deserve and worry about fighting and winning after that priority is met.
I'll say it again: the Walter Reed scandal is an indication of how the war is being poorly run. No matter how you slice it, that's the implication. And it's terrible to think that this is what happens during wartime.
Comments & Trackbacks
By Walker
March 15, 2007, 2:08 pm. PermaLink
This is exactly why we don't need/want government run healthcare!
WD
Leave a comment