I had an idea while writing another post. I wrote to Veterans Coalition the suggestions below.
For those of you unaware, SMEAC is a (I think ARMY) method of breaking a problem into parts (such as a wartime objective).
I am no wordsmith, if I were, it would take a third as many words to state my idea. Anyone whom feels they can summarize the concept, please do so, and run with it as you see fit. Semper Fi.
Dear Vet Coalition.
Thanks for being there!
First, let me explain this suggestion in S.M.E.A.C. form:
The Situation is: Vets using up their lifetimes in claim processing, simultaneously clogging the entitlement, compensation, treatment, systems with unnecessary repetitions of appointments. Often, for decades, we pay for our Service Connected disability med treatment, because the VA is so slow or unable to acknowledge its failures in claim processing. By the time we actually receive compensation, the money is worth a third to a tenth what is originally was worth- in 10-25 years. TRUST ME THERE IS MORE TO THIS. Next:
The Mission is: To help right-honorable veterans get what compensation they deserve under law, while the monies still have value, and usefulness. I expect the cost savings will roughly equate to the benefits paid out for the USA.
Execution of the mission: Start a task force that holds sway with the VA rating board, for vets to write to with a short description of what the VA keeps overlooking, and basic evidence to prove it.
Each task force panel will contain one doctor, one disabled veteran receiving VA compensation, one NSO from one of the claim-processing organizations, ie, DAV. They vote on support for the vets claim, a VA representative familiar with claim processing. I believe they should only need to spend 20 minutes on each claim- they can either a: vote for support and grant of claim b: for no opinion of the claim.
It is okay for the VA representative to look from his usual, suspicious, and "If not sure, deny the claim" standpoint. A simple majority rules. Support for the vets claim is passed to the rating board, as if from a higher VA authority, ie, the Secretary. Panel members are sworn to act in accord with the facts, the law, showing no favoritism nor inclination to spare the USA, VA, or military the truth.
In my opinion, the rating board should have no means to deny the claim, but as a disabled vet, losing the meat (Salad days) of my life to claim processing, I cannot speak with detachment on this one point.
Administration: If the vets claim is a: repeatedly denied by VA rating board, BVA, b: Regardless well founded, grounded, and based on fact, and pertinent, THEN the benefit is ordered "Granted" regardless of prior VA decisions to deny IF the task force panel decides so.
Control: This task force will not be permanent, perhaps five years. It will have a sunset clause and a poison pill clause- if the group determines it is creating injustices, it may order itself disassembled panel by panel. The task force should be done catching up the system in five years, and then disbanded. I leave it to you whether any "precedential" aspects are for consideration. Frankly, it seems problematic to me.
The following is a non-SMEAC letter describing the above suggestion, and includes a real-life example of how it would work:
Create a task force whom has sway with the VA rating board. Ask vets to write, in X number words or less, what the VA is missing, overlooking, erring, about, repeatedly, in their disability compensation claims. I suggest a limit of some kind on the evidence also, to help the vet pick and narrow his assertions.
If like me, most vets, over decades of claim processing a single valid issue, want to prove every tiny detail, to corral the VA. This is just unnecessary, and confusing, for vets AND the VA claim system. (This is part of the problem, actually, but another subject)
The objective is to reduce the backlog, and give relief to disabled veterans who have unpopular disabilities, as the law will provide, but the VA is reticent to admit the severity of their error and the injury. Speaking for myself, I dont want to SUE the VA for their grevious errors, I just want the "Someday" to arrive when the sun comes up, and I have finished my VA claim for spinal cord disease and dysfunction. Honestly, the VA claim system ruins mens (and womens) lives, by
twisting people unable to admit weakness into persons having to learn to beg..
Respectfully, sincerely, I HATE WHAT THE VA DOES TO MEN'S SOULS. It's UNSAT.
Example, real, of self:
in 1980, on one page of paper a doctor writes his findings while and after operating, in the military, at Bethesda, he opened my back up, and found extensive scarring (a spinal cord disease called arachnoiditis) even though he errantly operated inches away from the original injury. He wrote: "Appears the wrong level approached" "adhesions" (adhesions is an older term for the more specific "arachnoiditis")
Later, another doctor AGAIN OPERATING IN THE WRONG PLACE sees "Adhesions and scarring" thus supporting this progressive, incurable, spinal cord disease. Seems the VA doesnt like to admit error in order to take advantage of a rare opportunity for the truth to be revealed...
A bit like not wanting to admit a doctor accidently cutting me with a scalpel was how I discovered I was a hemopheliac. (making up an example)
If I have a permanent spinal cord disease in 1980, do I have still have a permanent spinal cord disease during the period in question (1986-1993)?
When the VA FINALLY (after over 15 years of claim processing) in 1996 admitted the issue, granted 100 percent TDIU they want me to hop in a time machine and go back for more evidence- BUT THEY HAVENT ACKNOWLEDGED THE EVIDENCE ALREADY SO CLEAR AND ABSOLUTE! The evidence shows a permanent, progressive, spinal cord disease, and VA specialists detail the cause inservice.. but the ADMIN VA fails to make the connection VA DOCTORS make!
So, I would argue to your task force panel:
"If the VA decided I was unemployable in 1986-1993, does the present day VA agree I was unemployable from 1986-1993?"
(See how deliciously clear this argument is? ) (too bad the VA cannot hear it)
I love my country, but realize now, SOMEONE has to fight the system- employees of VA are NOT suited, positioned, or able, to point out the flaws in the system- WE VETERANS MUST ACT.
I once got a speeding ticket, and the cop says "I don't like this part of the job, it seems wrong to me" and I said "Why dont you try to change it?" and the cop says (sober as all hell) "Thats not my job sir, it is YOUR job".
It is the same here, so I write the Vet Coalition with my remedy. Thanks for being there.
Otherwise, I will consider my job completed, if you write back indicating you read this email.
Question
SCIDVET
Dear Veterans,
I had an idea while writing another post. I wrote to Veterans Coalition the suggestions below.
For those of you unaware, SMEAC is a (I think ARMY) method of breaking a problem into parts (such as a wartime objective).
I am no wordsmith, if I were, it would take a third as many words to state my idea. Anyone whom feels they can summarize the concept, please do so, and run with it as you see fit. Semper Fi.
Dear Vet Coalition.
Thanks for being there!
First, let me explain this suggestion in S.M.E.A.C. form:
The Situation is: Vets using up their lifetimes in claim processing, simultaneously clogging the entitlement, compensation, treatment, systems with unnecessary repetitions of appointments. Often, for decades, we pay for our Service Connected disability med treatment, because the VA is so slow or unable to acknowledge its failures in claim processing. By the time we actually receive compensation, the money is worth a third to a tenth what is originally was worth- in 10-25 years. TRUST ME THERE IS MORE TO THIS. Next:
The Mission is: To help right-honorable veterans get what compensation they deserve under law, while the monies still have value, and usefulness. I expect the cost savings will roughly equate to the benefits paid out for the USA.
Execution of the mission: Start a task force that holds sway with the VA rating board, for vets to write to with a short description of what the VA keeps overlooking, and basic evidence to prove it.
Each task force panel will contain one doctor, one disabled veteran receiving VA compensation, one NSO from one of the claim-processing organizations, ie, DAV. They vote on support for the vets claim, a VA representative familiar with claim processing. I believe they should only need to spend 20 minutes on each claim- they can either a: vote for support and grant of claim b: for no opinion of the claim.
It is okay for the VA representative to look from his usual, suspicious, and "If not sure, deny the claim" standpoint. A simple majority rules. Support for the vets claim is passed to the rating board, as if from a higher VA authority, ie, the Secretary. Panel members are sworn to act in accord with the facts, the law, showing no favoritism nor inclination to spare the USA, VA, or military the truth.
In my opinion, the rating board should have no means to deny the claim, but as a disabled vet, losing the meat (Salad days) of my life to claim processing, I cannot speak with detachment on this one point.
Administration: If the vets claim is a: repeatedly denied by VA rating board, BVA, b: Regardless well founded, grounded, and based on fact, and pertinent, THEN the benefit is ordered "Granted" regardless of prior VA decisions to deny IF the task force panel decides so.
Control: This task force will not be permanent, perhaps five years. It will have a sunset clause and a poison pill clause- if the group determines it is creating injustices, it may order itself disassembled panel by panel. The task force should be done catching up the system in five years, and then disbanded. I leave it to you whether any "precedential" aspects are for consideration. Frankly, it seems problematic to me.
The following is a non-SMEAC letter describing the above suggestion, and includes a real-life example of how it would work:
Create a task force whom has sway with the VA rating board. Ask vets to write, in X number words or less, what the VA is missing, overlooking, erring, about, repeatedly, in their disability compensation claims. I suggest a limit of some kind on the evidence also, to help the vet pick and narrow his assertions.
If like me, most vets, over decades of claim processing a single valid issue, want to prove every tiny detail, to corral the VA. This is just unnecessary, and confusing, for vets AND the VA claim system. (This is part of the problem, actually, but another subject)
The objective is to reduce the backlog, and give relief to disabled veterans who have unpopular disabilities, as the law will provide, but the VA is reticent to admit the severity of their error and the injury. Speaking for myself, I dont want to SUE the VA for their grevious errors, I just want the "Someday" to arrive when the sun comes up, and I have finished my VA claim for spinal cord disease and dysfunction. Honestly, the VA claim system ruins mens (and womens) lives, by
twisting people unable to admit weakness into persons having to learn to beg..
Respectfully, sincerely, I HATE WHAT THE VA DOES TO MEN'S SOULS. It's UNSAT.
Example, real, of self:
in 1980, on one page of paper a doctor writes his findings while and after operating, in the military, at Bethesda, he opened my back up, and found extensive scarring (a spinal cord disease called arachnoiditis) even though he errantly operated inches away from the original injury. He wrote: "Appears the wrong level approached" "adhesions" (adhesions is an older term for the more specific "arachnoiditis")
Later, another doctor AGAIN OPERATING IN THE WRONG PLACE sees "Adhesions and scarring" thus supporting this progressive, incurable, spinal cord disease. Seems the VA doesnt like to admit error in order to take advantage of a rare opportunity for the truth to be revealed...
A bit like not wanting to admit a doctor accidently cutting me with a scalpel was how I discovered I was a hemopheliac. (making up an example)
If I have a permanent spinal cord disease in 1980, do I have still have a permanent spinal cord disease during the period in question (1986-1993)?
When the VA FINALLY (after over 15 years of claim processing) in 1996 admitted the issue, granted 100 percent TDIU they want me to hop in a time machine and go back for more evidence- BUT THEY HAVENT ACKNOWLEDGED THE EVIDENCE ALREADY SO CLEAR AND ABSOLUTE! The evidence shows a permanent, progressive, spinal cord disease, and VA specialists detail the cause inservice.. but the ADMIN VA fails to make the connection VA DOCTORS make!
So, I would argue to your task force panel:
"If the VA decided I was unemployable in 1986-1993, does the present day VA agree I was unemployable from 1986-1993?"
(See how deliciously clear this argument is? ) (too bad the VA cannot hear it)
I love my country, but realize now, SOMEONE has to fight the system- employees of VA are NOT suited, positioned, or able, to point out the flaws in the system- WE VETERANS MUST ACT.
I once got a speeding ticket, and the cop says "I don't like this part of the job, it seems wrong to me" and I said "Why dont you try to change it?" and the cop says (sober as all hell) "Thats not my job sir, it is YOUR job".
It is the same here, so I write the Vet Coalition with my remedy. Thanks for being there.
Otherwise, I will consider my job completed, if you write back indicating you read this email.
Sincerely,
Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
4
3
2
2
Popular Days
Jun 23
5
Jun 24
4
Jun 27
4
Jun 29
3
Top Posters For This Question
john999 4 posts
Berta 3 posts
Pete53 2 posts
SCIDVET 2 posts
Popular Days
Jun 23 2006
5 posts
Jun 24 2006
4 posts
Jun 27 2006
4 posts
Jun 29 2006
3 posts
17 answers to this question
Recommended Posts