| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| US Army scrambles to clean Walter Reed |
| 2007-03-05 |
| The abrupt departure of the secretary of the Army, taking place as an angry Defense secretary responded to public criticism of how the Pentagon has treated its war wounded, is giving Congress fresh reasons to look more closely at war operations. Monday, lawmakers are to begin a week of hearings that will look into the situation at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington – how conditions worsened there and why it appeared, at least, that no one was paying attention. The Army's surgeon general, Army Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley, and the commander of the hospital who was relieved of his duties, Army Maj. Gen. George Weightman, are to appear Monday on Capitol Hill. Intense questioning is expected from lawmakers on a subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The Army, meanwhile, is scrambling to rectify the situation: It's moving patients out of certain areas of Walter Reed in preparation for those places being refurbished, and it's creating new support initiatives to help wounded veterans of the war in Iraq. "We've got to make sure that our VA hospitals and our military hospitals in this country are equipped to provide the services [so] that our men and women in uniform and our veterans can be confident that they're going to get the help they need," said Sen. Trent Lott (R) of Mississippi, appearing on "This Week" on ABC. It's important to find out what happened, not to point fingers, Senator Lott said. "Why didn't we know more and do more?" he said. "I'm not ... trying to fix blame. I want to know how we're going to fix it." The unraveling at the Pentagon began after a story in the Feb. 18 editions of The Washington Post, which detailed problems at what's been considered the nation's premier military medical facility. The story outlined issues with the physical condition of one of the buildings, Building 18, where troops recuperate, receive counseling, or await outprocessing from the military. The report included details of rotting walls and mold and pest infestation, as well as bureaucratic bungling that delayed services or support. The portrayal of the hospital in the story sparked a furor in Washington. Within days, the Army had relieved General Weightman, and its leadership had identified General Kiley as the acting commander. A number of other, lower-level military personnel were also reassigned. But that was not enough for Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who didn't like the way the Army, which runs the hospital, was responding. For example, Kiley, in a press tour of the hospital in the wake of the newspaper article, criticized the report for being too one-sided. "I am disappointed that some in the Army have not adequately appreciated the seriousness of the situation pertaining to the outpatient care at Walter Reed," Secretary Gates said in a briefing last Friday. "Some have shown too much defensiveness and have not shown enough focus on digging into and addressing the problems." Following Gates' remarks, the Army announced that Maj. Gen. Eric Schoomaker, a physician, would be named as the permanent commander of the hospital. General Schoomaker's older brother, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, is the Army's chief of staff. Another flag officer who is not a physician is expected to be named to the hospital's command structure to ensure someone without a medical background can keep an eye on the improvements, according to a Washington Post report Sunday. Weightman's side of the story may emerge during the hearings. This may include the information that he did in fact listen to internal warnings last year about problems with staffing. The Army released a statement Saturday that indicated Weightman had responded to those internal warnings from Army Col. Peter Garibaldi, the Walter Reed garrison commander. Colonel Garibaldi had warned that "patient care services are at risk of mission failure" due to a privatization effort that left the hospital short-staffed. According to media reports, Garibaldi said that Weightman had addressed each of three issues raised. Rep. Henry Waxman (D) of California, who leads the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the Garibaldi memo raises "a new dimension to the problems at Walter Reed." The problems at Walter Reed could be symbolic of the kind of neglect that many lawmakers believe exists across the military. Funding for a war that costs up to $7 billion per month has strapped resources that normally would be spent elsewhere. Rep. John Murtha (D) of Pennsylvania, a respected |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #18 how many of those preening posturing pols right there in the beltway have spent any time down at WRAMC outside a photo op? Considering the MTF of choice by Congress, the Senate (and the Supreme Court) is Bethesda, probably not much. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-03-05 21:17 |
| #17 "I don't do barracks inspections," said Kiley That was pretty much From the GI War , Epilogue, by Ralph G. Martin: … As soon as Representative Kelly introduced him, Regan showed the Committee just how his leg worked, with all the belts and straps. He told them how tough it was to sit down, that it was outmoded a hundred percent, because it was the same amputees got twenty-five years ago. Then he told how it weighted thirteen pounds, and he never wore it anymore because it was too heavy. “It seems I wear it under the same strain as if I were running with two legs,” he said. “I realize I have a very bad amputation,:” he continued, “I realize that I’m very lucky to be alive but I feel that something should be done to make these legs lighter. All I ask for is a limb I can get around on comfortably. If the government and private companies can build a B-29, surely they can do this job. Remember, there are 16,000 amputees coming out of this war.” When Representative Kelly thanked Regan and ll the others for coming, a veteran named Robert Rogers jumped up and said, “We thank you for listening. Most people are scared to listen and say, ‘Jesus Christ, let the Army look after you.’ Of course, they do nothing about it. We certainly thank you for listening.” Outside the small red building of American University, the sidewalk was dangerously icy. Some of the students were slowly crossing the slushy street, but most of them were still eating in the small luncheonette. Several of the men were talking about a story in the newspapers, telling how the government had indicted forty-five manufacturing firms of artificial limbs for agreeing on “identical and noncompetitive prices” forcing amputees to pay several hundred dollars for a limb. The story also mentioned that the government had decided to spend a million dollars a year for prosthetic research. … You got to ask yourself how much has really changed? Not only did the commanders fail in management by wandering around [if it don’t get looked at, it don’t get done], but how many of those preening posturing pols right there in the beltway have spent any time down at WRAMC outside a photo op? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-03-05 16:13 |
| #16 "I don't do barracks inspections," said Kiley, This jamoke apparently never heard of MBWA. |
| Posted by: GORT 2007-03-05 15:33 |
| #15 Lieutenant General Kevin C. Kiley, M.D. OB/GYN Major General George W. Weightman, M.D. Weightman should have know better, he started as Infantry. |
| Posted by: Steve 2007-03-05 14:17 |
| #14 Commanders never in Building 18 WASHINGTON, March 5 (UPI) -- Two former heads of Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington testified they were unaware of conditions in Building 18 because they'd never been there. The Washington Post last week exposed the poor conditions under which wounded U.S. soldiers are being housed at what has been described as the crown jewel of the nation's military medical system, including black mold and holes in the walls. "How could you not know?" U.S. Rep. Michael Turner, R-Ohio, Monday asked Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley and Maj. Gen. George Weightman during a U.S. House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reforms Committee hearing. "I don't do barracks inspections," said Kiley, who lives across the street. Weightman said he had walked through many of the buildings at Walter Reed, but not Building 18. Bet they're both career doctors who never led any troops. |
| Posted by: Steve 2007-03-05 14:10 |
| #13 Didn't this come up n the 80s???? |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2007-03-05 13:30 |
| #12 There's a part of the problem that isn't being addressed here. Call it "institutional apathy". Generals are only interested in combat forces. The maimed and injured are not combat forces, and get what's left over. There's only one clear way to solve this - put the Veterans' Department under the Department of Defense, and make the care of military veterans as important to Defense as offensive combat operations (in other words, you broke it, you fix it or pay for it). I've personally seen too many instances where "operational readiness" took precedence over safety and individual health issues. Make the DOD responsible for the military veteran from the day he joins until the day he dies. It's the only way to get the generals' and admirals' attention. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-03-05 13:23 |
| #11 The fix is to get rid of the VA providing health care. Let the veteran pick the provider of the health care and have the VA reimburse the vet. Socialized medicine stinks, whether in Britain, Cuba, Russia or the US. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-03-05 10:48 |
| #10 To piggy back on the many good comments here, this is NOT a new problem and has been around for generations. My fear is that after a lot of finger pointing they will do little to fix the problem. The problem is that they have not allocated money to upgrade or repair facilities for outpatient/recovery. The “fix” is simply for Congress to allocate some funding directed solely at that problem. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2007-03-05 10:38 |
| #9 Mental Image of a Cat scratching franticly trying to "Cover" a Mess on a Tile Floor. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-03-05 10:34 |
| #8 It's important to find out what happened, not to point fingers, Senator Lott said. Got that dead backwards did you? and I'll just bet you expect us citizens to swallow that lie whole without question, Won't happen, we know Walter Reed was strangled financialy, we know you know it too, so happy Witch Hunt, Watch your polls fall like a rock while you scramble to find someone to blame that's NOT a member of the Finance Committee. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-03-05 10:25 |
| #7 The outbuildings at Walter Reed were decaying as far back as the late 80s. Reason: the hospital has long been on the closing-block. This all would be a good thing if it wasn't for the fact that the entire motivation here is political-based, and not out of concern about the wounded. They're just a convenient tool. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-03-05 09:50 |
| #6 Free national heath care for the Military works so well, why not extend it to the entire country? It's free. And worth every penny. In fact, exactly so. |
| Posted by: Theatle Bluetooth3554 2007-03-05 09:15 |
| #5 "It happened because the resources are so much in Iraq. They've spent so much money that they've ignored the very thing that is so important to our troops at home," Of course, Johnny boy, if they hadn't gone to war, none of 'em would be in the hospital. If the best emergency care in the world hadn't saved so many lives, there wouldn't be so many in the hospital. And what about your votes on military spending, Johnny? Congress didn't have enough oversight to prevent this? What about your calls to retreat? How many are in the hospital because of YOU, Congressman Murtha? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2007-03-05 08:36 |
| #4 What caused the problem? Congress, specifically BRAC 2005: the merger of Walter Reed Army Medical Center and National Naval Medical Center by September 2011 into one tri-service military medical center located on the Bethesda campus. That facility will be called the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, and it will be staffed by Air Force, Army, and Navy military personnel. When you're told your facillity is going to be closed in a few years, your maintenance budget goes away. Anyone who has been on a BRACed base will tell you how things go down hill. |
| Posted by: Steve 2007-03-05 08:36 |
| #3 For those of us who've served, what's so different from what we've experienced at one time or another? From one assignment to another? I'd be surprised if someone out there hasn't lived in substandard housing, worked or been serviced in substandard facilities, done without proper equipment, or had rotten rations for a period of time. Unfortunately, the process witnessed all too often is that someone has to be the 'Lucky Pierre', the sacrifice, before something actually get done. He/she is the person who's sitting in the chair when the event finely comes to front, after numerous others had chaired the same seat for assignment after assignment with the same deficiencies present. I've never seen a 'look back' to tag those previous holder of the skunk. It's only the present occupant who pays. Like theater, timing is everything. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-03-05 08:01 |
| #2 "Some have shown too much defensiveness and have not shown enough focus on digging into and addressing the problems." We get a lot of this in China. The problem isn't the problem, the problem is that someone is talking about it. Silence the talker, and the problem goes away. Not surprised to see the U.S. government act the same way, though. |
| Posted by: gromky 2007-03-05 06:31 |
| #1 "Some have shown too much defensiveness and have not shown enough focus on digging into and addressing the problems." We get a lot of this in China. The problem isn't the problem, the problem is that someone is talking about it. Silence the talker, and the problem goes away. Not surprised to see the U.S. government act the same way, though. |
| Posted by: gromky 2007-03-05 06:31 |