INDIVISIBLE Lambertville NJ / New Hope PA

Category: US Military

  • Get the Facts – Our Veterans

    Contributed by Olga Vanucci. 

    Just the Facts:

    • There are about 20 million veterans in the U.S., 7% of the population, and 1 out of 10 are women.
    • 4 million veterans served since 2001, and 17% of those veterans are women.
    • 9 million veterans are 65+ years old.
    • 7 million veterans aged 18-64 are in the labor force, and they have higher annual incomes than non-veterans.
    • 4-5 million veterans have a service-connected disability, 20-25% of all veterans.
    • Among veterans who served since 2001, 1.7 million, over 40%, have a service-connected disability, and nearly half of these veterans have a service-connected disability rating of 60% or higher, meaning more severe.
    • One-third of employed veterans with a disability work in federal, state, or local government, compared with 19% of veterans with no disability and 13% of non-veterans.

    Sources:  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/10/the-changing-face-of-americas-veteran-population/ and https://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2017/veterans-day.html and https://adata.org/factsheet/employment-data-veterans-disabilities and https://www.bls.gov/news.release/vet.nr0.htm

  • A Veteran’s Perspective

    Contributed by Terry Rice. 

    In just a few days, we will commemorate the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I, a war in which 65 million soldiers from 30 nations fought for four years resulting in the deaths of over 20 million people.  Hostilities ended at 11 AM on November 11th, 1918 following the signing of an armistice between the Allied powers and Germany.  The anniversary of that agreement has been observed every year since then. At first, Armistice Day was meant to celebrate and promote peace while honoring those that had served in World War I.  In 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower renamed the anniversary to Veterans Day and expanded the honorees to include those who served in World War II and the Korean War. More recently, Veterans Day has become a day where we acknowledge and honor anyone who has served in the US Armed Forces.   But for me as a Veteran, November 11th is a time for reflection.  

    Veterans day reminds me that I come from a long tradition of military service.  I have more than a dozen relatives that have served or continue to serve, including my father who spent 22 years as a non-commissioned officer in the US Army.  In that tradition, I ended up going to West Point and serving 10 years as a US Army Officer. One of the proudest moments of my life was when my father rendered me my first salute.  

    Veterans Day is an opportunity for those of us that have served to be a bridge to others that have little to no experience with the military. Numerous studies have shown that there is an increasing divide between the military and the civilian communities. Today less than 0.5% of the US population currently serves on active duty, an historic low, making it unlikely for the average person to have any interaction with someone who is serving.  Military base consolidation over the last few decades has only exacerbated the issue, to the point that about half of the 1.3 million active duty personnel live in massive, self-contained military bases in just five states: California, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia. Furthermore, today’s recruits disproportionately come from families where a parent or close relative has served, thus perpetuating the isolation.

    This divide makes it harder for the citizens of the US to effectively exercise civilian control over the military when voting on candidates and military related issues. At the same time, the isolation also makes it hard for the military to reflect society’s priorities, if the military increasingly becomes a secluded warrior class. Therefore it is important for those of us who have served and now live in non-military communities to share what it is like to be in the armed forces, to identify and explain the challenges our service members face, to explain the impact that seventeen continuous years of combat have had on our military, and to continuously debunk myths that arise about the military.  

    The Shift in Veterans’ Political Affiliations

    The latter point is one that I have dealt with quite a bit recently.  I am constantly amazed by how many people upon hearing that I am a former Army Officer immediately assume I am a Republican.  This faulty assumption holds true across the political spectrum; people tend to think members of the military vote staunchly Republican; especially members of the officer corps.  While it is true that the military generally leans Republican, which is reflective of the higher percentage of men and recruits from rural areas, recent years have seen a significant increase in military members affiliating as Independents.  Almost all of that shift has come from members formerly identifying as Republican. In fact, one recent survey showed nearly 40 percent of the military no longer affiliates with either major party and that percentage appears to be increasing.  

    Those of us who have served need to make sure we are engaged with our elected officials.  Just as the percentage of Americans who are veterans has declined, so has the share of Congress members with prior military service.  Currently, only about 20% of Congress members have any prior military service. When one considers active-duty experience (not just Reserve status), the numbers are significantly less.  This is a significant decrease from 65% just just a few decades ago.

    Given the tremendous authority Congress has over military, it is critical that veterans communicate with their senators and representatives either directly (e.g., phone calls, letters, and in person meetings) or indirectly through veterans’ advocacy groups. Veterans Day is a great time to initiate or re-initiate this contact.  Veterans should also consider voting for the significant number of veterans running for Congress in 2018 — many of whom are running as Democrats.

    Immigrants in the US Military

    Those of us who happen to be both Veterans and immigrants must get involved in the current debate on immigration. While many people may assume that intersection is very small, the Migration Policy Institute estimates there are approximately 511,000 immigrant Veterans of the US military, including those from Mexico (16%) and the Philippines (13%).  Currently, the appalling treatment of immigrant service members and their families threatens the security of the United States. The current administration is planning to cancel the Military Accessions Vital to National Interest (MAVNI) program that allows certain legal immigrants with critical skills such as strategic languages, key technical competencies, or medical education to earn green cards via military service. More than 10,000 soldiers have entered this program since 2009.  The administration is considering the cancellation of more than 1,000 contracts with individuals that were planning to enter the military in the coming year. Many, if not most of these individuals will have to return to their home countries. This would be a significant loss of critical talent when the military has a hard time recruiting these skills. This country has a long history of immigrants serving in the armed forces particularly during times of conflict. In fact, more than 20% of the Congressional Medal of Honor recipients were immigrants including at least one, Silvestre Herrera, who was “undocumented.”

    Even more disturbing is the fact that as many as 11,800 current service members are now dealing with the possibility of having a spouse of family member deported after a recent change to immigration policy.  Some of these family members have been in the US for decades and saw their service member deploy to Iraq and/or Afghanistan multiple times. These actions will likely separate families and significantly reduce the mission readiness of these service members while they focus on the challenge these cases.  

    “…Against All Enemies, Foreign and Domestic”

    Finally, all of us who took the oath of office “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic” must be outspoken about the domestic threats that are increasingly menacing our country.  The rise of racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, nationalism, and other philosophies of fear and hate have the potential to significantly damage or even destroy this amazing country. We cannot stand by quietly as individuals inspired by these hateful ideologies engage in horrific actions as occurred in Charlottesville, Pittsburgh, and mail facilities across the US.  This is not normal. We need to get out and exercise our constitutional responsibility to vote. When necessary, we must protest peacefully, yet vocally, against the worst instincts of the people and institutions inciting violence. We must also be alert and aware of potential acts of violence and report them to law enforcement immediately. We must do what we can to repel these emerging domestic enemies.  

    In closing, Veterans Day, was originally designed as a day to commemorate service and to promote peace.  On this hundredth anniversary of the end of World War I, we should honor our veterans for their selfless service, and think about how we can ensure peace and stability in the United States.  I know that is what I will be thinking about on November 11th.

    Terry Rice is a graduate of West Point and former Captain in the US Army where he served with the 101st Airborne Division and US Forces Korea.

  • The Veterans Affairs Healthcare System: Politics and the Privatization Debate

    Contributed by Paige Barnett. 

    The largest healthcare system in the U.S., the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) System, provides a wide range of services to those who have served in the military. As a taxpayer-funded endeavor, it is often subject to scrutiny by the media as well as political fodder for either party or agenda. Due to its size, complexity and needs of patients, the VA health care network has its own unique set of challenges. Republicans have called for privatization of the system, but whether this would serve the best interests and needs of the patients is open to debate.  

    Frequent stories in the media are often quick to point to failings and little about successes of the VHA. For example, in 2014, CNN ran an investigative expose, “A Fatal Wait: Veterans Languish and Die on a VA Hospital’s Secret Wait List.” which uncovered a long wait list of veterans at the Phoenix VA hospital. Undoubtedly, it was a situation that needed to be addressed and remedied. This story does not speak for all who experience the VHA care, however. “If you’ve ever been to a VA (Veterans Affairs) hospital, then you’ve only ever been to one VA hospital,”  said Dr. Roy Feldman, retired Chief, Dental Service of the VHA Hospital in Philadelphia.

    That is to say, not all VA hospitals are created equal; some are competently operated, while others lack competent leadership.  In fact, the consumer surveys of veteran end users show very favorable ratings in terms of delivery of care, with the VHA ranking better or best.  In addition, there is a “Choice” program, whereby if a veteran is unable to receive services through the local VHA, the VA will pay for an outside service.  In the treatment of PTSD and spinal cord injuries, the VHA ranks the best. Further, the doctors and nurses of the VHA are aligned with the mission to serve the veterans to the best of their abilities.    

    Political agendas are fueled by questions about whether the level of care delivered is an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars. A report by the VA Inspector General issued earlier this year which cited examples of financial waste and actions detrimental to patient safety at the Washington, DC hospital, served to heighten demands by the Republican administration to privatize the VHA system. It was also one of the factors leading to the ouster of VA Secretary, David Shulkin, who opposed privatization. Trump subsequently failed in his attempt to replace Shulkin his own personal doctor, Ronny L. Jackson, ultimately naming Robert Wilkie to the position in May 2018.

    Those with experience working within the VHA believe that the two most pressing problems are appropriating money without a succinct plan, and policy making that does not address the needs of the patients. To be sure, the size and scope of the VHA can slow down necessary changes, which is again, an oft-cited reason by the Republicans to privatize the system. But it’s that very size, complexity and unique needs of the patients that may be the saving grace of the VHA.

    Would it be wise to  privatize the second largest governmental budget? As Dr. Feldman aptly said, “You can’t get more politically correct than to support veterans.”  

    And never, ever mess with what is rightfully due to our veterans.

    Additional Reading:

  • TRUMP’S MILITARY AGENDA: Build to Destroy

    Contributed by Lisa Bergson. 

    WHEN ALI HAJAJI’S SON FELL ILL with diarrhea and vomiting, the desperate father turned to extreme measures. Following the advice of village elders, he pushed the red-hot tip of a burning stick into Shaher’s chest, a folk remedy to drain the “black blood” from his son.

    “People said burn him in the body and it will be O.K.,” Mr. Hajaji said. “When you have no money, and your son is sick, you’ll believe anything.”1

    Although not our biggest-ever defense budget — as Trump likes to boast2 — his two-year $1.4 trillion military spending authorization raises issues relating to economics and efficacy. On its face, our military spending should make our country stronger and safer, and, working in tandem with a robust and intelligent diplomatic effort, promote American values of democracy and free trade around the world.  Yet we find presently find ourselves collaborating with Saudi Arabia in a dubious proxy war with Iran, transpiring in one of the world’s poorest countries, Yemen.  There, the Saudis have promoted a strategy of economic strangulation, driving down Yemeni currency, blockading aid, and turning a blind eye to corruption among local coalition-backed officials.3

    This continues the sorry saga of our engagement in The Middle East, where we have been active, at least since the George W. Bush invasion of Iraq in 2003.  The on-going lack of a well-thought-out endgame has plagued our direct and proxy wars, drained our Treasury, brutally damaged our reputation, inflamed terrorism, and exacerbated the refugee crisis.  As bravely illustrated in the New York Times, our tragic engagement in Yemen has put the populace on the brink of mass starvation and led to desperate measures, such as those conducted by Mr.Hajaji, who was trying to save his second son from the fate of his first – death by famine. “All the big countries say they are fighting each other in Yemen,” he said. “But it feels to us like they are fighting the poor people.”4

    At home, the economic impact of our growing emphasis on military build-up is more insidious and may take years to emerge. But already, Trump’s stepped-up military spending, combined with huge tax cuts, has drastically raised our government deficit, fueling inflation, which ultimately threatens our economic stability.  By putting money into non-consumable military expenditures, as opposed to goods and services that people can use, scarcity grows and, with it, higher prices.  That leads to inflation, classically defined as too many dollars chasing too few goods. Think supply & demand.

    Indeed, Trump’s stance is eerily reminiscent of the 1981-1989 Reagan era’s disastrous combination of “trickle down” economics, heavily cutting taxes for the wealthy, and military build-up.5  In what seems almost paltry compared to today’s budget, President Reagan planned to raise military spending from $162 billion in 1981 to $343 billion a year in 1986. Writing in 1981, MIT economist Lester Thurow warned against the potential damage this would have on the economy.  The accuracy of his predictions bears special consideration in our present scenario.

    Thurow foresaw that Reagan’s policies would lead to:

    • Inflation: Thurow sagely predicted “bottleneck inflation” based on the diversion of resources (manpower, materials, money) to military expenditures, leading to a drop in overall productivity. That said, his dire predictions actually fell way short of the real damage that resulted. Thurow wrote (boldface mine):

    If productivity does not recover and the economy’s real growth rate is 3 percentage points less than Mr. Reagan predicts…[and] the President is underestimating 1982 expenditures by $25 billion…. you have a deficit of $111 billion in fiscal 1986.6

    At the end of the day, by 1986, Reagan actually doubled the national debt from $998 billion to $2.1 trillion7!

    • Less innovation: “Since our high-technology civilian industries…demand the same equipment and personnel as our military industries, a rapid military buildup can only occur by taking resources out of the high-technology civilian sectors. The effects are going to be particularly severe in the semiconductor industry since it is going to be facing a Japanese onslaught during the next three years…. [But) our computer industry will be hemorrhaging personnel just when it needs its best brains to survive,” Thurow wrote.

    He was beyond prescient. The U.S. semiconductor industry, which had been in the forefront, fell so far behind the Japanese that the government (we taxpayers) had to pony up $500 million in 1987 for a five-year program run by the Department of Defense to “regain competitiveness”.8,9

    In addition to the damage to our high-tech industry, this writer also saw first-hand how Reagan’s policy sabotaged initiatives to become less carbon-dependent, as one of Reagan’s first budget cuts was to table all of President Jimmy Carter’s programs to develop alternative energy.  (Just think how far ahead of the global warming curve we would be if even a fraction of those projects had come to fruition!)

    To make matters worse, Bill Clinton wound up ripping into the welfare safety net and making other unpopular moves to restore our economy, much as Obama’s efforts to promote a socially progressive and economically restorative agenda were undercut, in part, by pressure to clean-up the enormous Bush deficit. (Someday it would be nice to see the Republicans clean up their own mess – or, then again, maybe it wouldn’t.  In any case, it is always the poor and the middle class who pay the price for these faulty policies.)

    Based on his experience, Robert Reich, Clinton’s former Labor Secretary, offers a lucid account of our current debacle:

    Since taking office, Trump has increased military spending by more than $200 billion. Let’s take a second to look at how else that $200 billion could be spent. We could, for example:

    Offer free public colleges and universities, as proposed by Bernie Sanders.

    And fund the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

    And expand broadband internet access to rural America.

    And meet the growing needs for low-income housing, providing safe living conditions for families and the elderly.

    And help repair the physical devastation in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria.10

    Of course, you could argue that protecting our nation is paramount, regardless of the cost to our economy and our civilian programs. But, this assumes that our military strategy is effective. For his part, Reich, now the chancellor’s professor for public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, questions how much of our “bloated” defense budget, more than two times that of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea combined, goes to waste:

    According to the Pentagon’s own internal figures, the department could save at least $125 billion by reducing operational overhead.

    Out-of-control defense contractors also drive up spending. In the coming years, cost overruns alone are projected to reach an estimated $484 billion. Meanwhile, the CEOs of the top five defense firms took home $97.4 million in compensation last year11

    These days, the rapidly expanding varieties and sophistication of “virtual threats”, like Chinese- backed infrastructure hackers and Russian social media trolls and election meddling, as well as the destructive and scary activities of domestic crazies, such as the recent massacre by a social-media-fueled anti-Semite, and the rise of Trump-inspired militias, like the Ku Klux Klan and the “Proud Boys” are examples of the confounding array of ways to wreak havoc and destruction. There is also a critical need to address the underlying causes of the destabilizing refugee crisis plaguing the west.  Such dislocations are prompted by vast geopolitical forces tied to the impacts of global warming, internecine wars, and terrorism — issues that all the drones in the world cannot eradicate.

    Aside from the lack of a viable endgame in conflict zones, U.S. military spending may be misdirected or, at a minimum, imbalanced with “soft-power” diplomatic, cultural, and economic programs. By way of example, Trump cut U.S.-sponsored “Peace Programs” in Israel that fostered Israel-Palestine musical gatherings and interfaith schools for children, designed to encourage tolerance and appreciation of differing cultures.  “This is my only chance to meet a Palestinian,” a 17-year-old Israeli musician, who loves Arabic music, told NPR’s “Here and Now”.12

    At a time when the threats we face call for a multi-faceted and well-orchestrated approach, our tools for promoting democracy and free trade (assuming these remain, in fact, our goals) become lesser and blunter. Echoing Thurow, Reich writes, “As Trump stokes tensions around the world, he’s adding fuel to the fire by demanding even more Pentagon spending. It’s a dangerous military buildup intended to underwrite endless wars and enrich defense contractors, while draining money from investment in the American people.”

    You that never done nothing
    But build to destroy
    You play with my world
    Like it’s your little toy
    “Masters of War”13 – Bob Dylan

    1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/26/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-war-yemen.html
    2. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-defense-spending-exaggerations/
    3. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/26/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-war-yemen.html?module=inline
    4. ibid.
    5. “Beware of Reagan’s Military Spending”, Lester Thurow, The New York Times, May 31, 1981
    6. https://www.thebalance.com/national-debt-by-year-compared-to-gdp-and-major-events-3306287
    7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics
    8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEMATECH
    9. Interesting false history from conservative site, crediting Reagan’s policies for revitalizing Silicon Valley! https://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1957.html
    10. https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-trump-increased-military-spending-over-200-billion-heres-how-983843
    11. ibid.
    12. http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018/11/01/trump-cuts-funds-palestinian-peace-groups
    13. “Masters of War”, Bob Dylan, 1963, https://genius.com/Bob-dylan-masters-of-war-lyrics

     

    A flock of birds fly past the Marine One helicopter with U.S. President Donald Trump aboard, as he returns to the White House after a visit to the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Washington, U.S., December 21, 2017. REUTERS/JIM BOURG