The V.A. Hospital Scandals Look Even Worse

 Posted:  July 6, 2014

The linked article below from CNS News, shows salaries of the 342,089 workers for the V.A. About 20% of the V.A. employees, and that includes Doctors, make over $100,000 a year. That is to be expected.

Looking at the rest of the salaries, however, you wonder why the V.A. staff got bonuses from the Federal government to do anything. Employees at the V.A. look like they are paid well considering they have retirement benefits, sick and vacation leave, healthcare, and all the other perks that lots of jobs used to have in the U.S.

The most startling statistic comes at the end of the article where it states that “The V.A. paid $200 million in wrongful death payments to 1000 families of deceased vets between 2001 and 2010.”

This tells us at DoesTomUdallRepresentYou.com that there were persistent problems at the V.A. for a long time. This tells us that negligence was afoot and that people knew about these problems. It tells us that Tom Udall knew about the problem and has shown no proof he did anything to fix it. If he didn’t know about problems at the Vet hospitals in Albuquerque and at outpatient clinics in the state he should have. Negligence like that doesn’t deserve a vote.

The scandals just grow by the day, one eclipsing the next. The V.A. scandal is just another headline in the Albuquerque Journal by now.

Tom Udall has done his part. He has called for a man to resign and that has supposedly pacified everyone. Vets know better. Perhaps vets, who know what happened, will step up and tell their story to whomever will listen? Perhaps an enterprising young reporter will tackle the story and find all the details locked away in a computer? Perhaps the campaign will bring out more on the story?

One thing is certain. Accountability has to be worked at. Tom Udall hasn’t shown he tended to business in this case. We would love to be wrong but we want to see proof that even one of our Congressmen tried to hold the government accountable.

Full article here >>>.


Comments are closed.