All Episodes
Previous Next
March 5, 2023 - Stew Peters Show
57:01
The Richard Leonard Show: The VA Caregiver Program: Hindrance Or Help? III
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
spent a lot of time talking about the VA Family Caregiver Program.
My good friend Robin has graciously given her time to give us the information.
Today, we are going to keep going down that road and I'm telling you folks, it's going to get juicy, so stick with us.
Don't go away.
We start now.
Thank you again for joining us this week.
Before we get started with Robin, we need to, of course, take a minute to talk about how the show is made possible, and that's Cortez Wealth Management.
Get yourself over to AmericaFirstRetirementPlan.com.
Sign up for the webinars.
They happen on Tuesday and Thursday evenings at 7 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Let Carlos Cortez help you design, plan, and execute a tax-free retirement plan.
When you get done with your job or jobs or whatever it is that you do for a living, you deserve to be comfortable, relaxed, and live out the rest of your days well.
So get on over to AmericaFirstRetirementPlan.com, sign up.
If you have any questions, once the information has been given to you, feel free to reach out to Carlos.
He is more than happy to help you answer any questions or address any concerns that you may have.
AmericaFirstRetirementPlan.com.
Get on over there.
Check it out.
Okay, so in the last couple weeks, folks, we have dug deep into the VA Family Caregiver Program.
We've talked a little bit about the good things.
We've also talked about a lot of bad or less than desirable things.
And unfortunately, it seems like there are more less desirable things happening with the program at this point now than good.
Although there are some good things.
But we're just going to keep going down this road.
You know, things are what they are, and we can only put out the information that we have.
So let me get Robin here.
There she is.
Hey, Robin, how are you?
Hi, I'm doing well.
How are you?
I am great.
Thanks for coming back.
Again, this week, we all really appreciate your time.
And so, Robin, in the last couple of weeks, we have discussed things with the program, you know, eligibility, qualifications, staff training we talked about last week, which was pretty atrocious, erroneous reports and veterans records. which was pretty atrocious, erroneous reports and veterans records.
And so we got all that information.
And I think that it's good for us to kind of just continue trudging through all this stuff.
So where are we at now?
If I'm not mistaken, we would be at around 2015 to 2017, somewhere in there, and some confrontation that the VA started to have with Congress.
Yes?
Well, they were having confrontation with the caregivers and the veterans that had been discharged.
The media was reporting that there was numerous cases of caregivers and veterans graduating out of this program.
So in 2017, then-Secretary Shulkin, he's not the secretary now, but he called a pause on the program.
And they issued this pause until July of 2017 when they re-evaluated everything, retrained the staff.
We kind of reviewed what the training was.
Yeah.
And so they restarted the program in July of 2017.
And then the Congress had a hearing kind of to reflect on this in 2018.
So that's where we're at right now.
It's in 2018.
See, now it's a good thing that you're here, Robin, to keep us on good track because apparently I have trouble with my time, my timeline.
We're trying to work on a timeline.
Keep that in mind, folks, that right now we are in 2018.
All right.
So, VA Caregiver Support Program Correcting Course for Veteran Caregivers.
Okay.
Well, three people from the VA testified.
I'm not going to speak about Dr.
Allman, but I am going to talk about then VA Secretary David Shulkin and Margaret Meg Cabot, Acting Chief Consultant, Care Management, Chaplain in Social Work Services, Veterans Health Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
Well, that's a lot of hats.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, Robin, but let me ask you a question quick.
Margaret Cabot, isn't she the lady some shows ago that we asked to go lay by a dish?
Yes, that's the same woman.
So she has had her fingers in this program for a long time, not just now, When we were focusing on the purges that were supposed to happen last year, but way before that?
She was the deputy director from 2011 to 2014, and then from 2015 until 2019, she was also the national director.
Well, she was the national director, not also.
But she was also this, she testified as the acting chief consultant, care management, chaplain, and social work services.
So she was the lead consultant for the program that she implemented and wrote the policy for.
I don't know if she was just like, hey, Margaret, you want to graduate some veterans?
And she was like, sure, Meg.
Sounds like fun.
Like, I'm not quite sure.
Yeah, who is she consulting?
Herself!
Herself, silly!
Meg Cabot, do you have multiple personalities?
Is one of you laying by a dish and the other one causing trouble?
I'm sorry.
I digress.
Anyway, continue, Robin.
So they are being grilled by the VA about everything that's happening in the program.
And Secretary Shulkin says, because at this time there's talks of expanding to pre-9-11 caregivers.
Okay.
And Silken says that he wants to expand, but he wants to do it in a thoughtful way.
He wants to restrict all participants, all future participants, sorry.
Future participants need restricted.
So he's talking about restricting the program only for pre-9-11 veterans.
And so he's proud to establish a new federal advisory committee, which is the same committee that you and I went to.
So, he is proud to say that former Senator Dole has agreed to chair this Federal Advisory Committee, and that along with the Rays Council, we will figure out how to expand this program.
I'm not going to talk too much about the Rays Council today.
We will get there, but remember it.
So then we have Mr.
Bilirakis, and he actually has some great questions.
He says, what immediate response did the VA have to these purges?
And Secretary Shulkin says, you know, we've got new regulations.
We retrained the program.
Folks, we saw the training.
It was awful.
He also asked, why are the veterans discharged to even begin with?
Great question.
Right?
Why?
And so Secretary Shulkin says because they got better.
They got better.
Says who?
Social workers?
Anyway, he says they got better or they were assessed the wrong way to begin with.
You know, and the training that we viewed kind of showed us that they already had this blanket graduation scheme going on.
So I really don't know how well I trust that these veterans did get better.
Their medical charts didn't show that they got better.
Well, this all goes back to, in my opinion, Robin, this all goes back to the idea that the eligibility for this program was decided by some people.
as we discussed, clinical teams and not any, at this point then, veterans weren't being evaluated by their care teams.
They were being evaluated by people who don't know them.
And so I guess my question would be, is why would that not have been one of the first things on the docket for changing this program?
But there's probably not an answer to that.
I ask that question to this day.
I ask that question.
That's how it was written in the law implementation in 2011.
Why wouldn't we go back to that model?
And what was the answer you got?
Well nobody, you know, we'll get to it.
There's been research that shows that it's not therapeutic.
Wait a minute.
It's not therapeutic to be evaluated by the doctor that knows my conditions and knows my ailments and how I work and function?
Who cares if it's therapeutic?
These are the people that know about my problems.
Yeah.
So, you know, I think that if the people that are evaluating the caregivers and veterans to be in this program, if they're not competent enough to make the correct decision to enter and enroll us, how are they competent enough to discharge us?
Wow.
Great question.
You know, and the same guy, you know, Mr.
Bilirakis, he says, Why has effective communication between VA and caregivers about eligibility been such a challenge for this program?
Again, I hear it from constituents on a regular basis.
And so, Secretary Shulkin is just, I mean, real quick with it.
This is the reason I created the Federal Advisory Committee.
You know, communication.
We need a direct line of communication with the veterans and caregivers.
And so that was the purpose.
And I've read it on the charter and in the FACA database.
It says that the whole purpose of the committee is to have a direct line of communication to people like me and my husband.
So they can then take our voice back to the VA. But you were there that first day.
They said that 30 to 39 year age group didn't trust the VA. They didn't trust the VA. Weird.
And how many of us were sitting in the back row in the 30 to 39 age group?
Did one of them stand up and say, hey guys, why don't you trust us?
Yeah.
They said, let's research this.
Let's research why they don't trust us.
Where's the common sense?
Yeah, save yourself some time and money.
And I think, and I don't remember verbatim what my words were, but I think that I mentioned to them, the people that you're looking to speak to are here.
They're sitting right here.
It was in your public comment, yes sir.
Okay, and so when the meeting was over, I witnessed absolutely zero members of that committee walk over and have a conversation.
I think there was one or two that came over and thanked us for being there and speaking.
But nobody had an intelligent, meaningful conversation about what these issues were.
You know, that people like you, Robin, and the other caregivers that spoke that day The information that you guys gave them just went right over their head.
I would agree.
So what is this committee really doing is my question.
And I feel like we're going to get into that.
That's the theme here is that we're going to get there.
We will eventually get to the committee.
It runs parallel to this caregiver timeline.
Okay.
But when you start mixing the two, it can get overwhelming very quickly.
And I'm just trying to keep everything in the caregiver realm for right now.
All right.
Fair enough.
We don't lose the audience.
Yeah.
Yeah.
We don't want to lose you folks.
You're important.
So, Mr.
Takano kind of calls Secretary Shulkin out and he says, do you or do you not have the authority to expand this program to pre-9-11 veterans?
And former Secretary Shulkin kind of backpedals and he's just like, no, we need legislative authority.
And Mr.
Takano is just like, but you have publicly stated that you have the authority.
So, which is...
And I think Meg interjects and he just kind of hush.
Like, I'm talking.
Like, do you or do you not have the authority?
And they squabble a little bit about terms and stipends.
And I guess they don't ever really come to an answer.
There is not a straight answer given other than...
He needs legislative authority.
He never did answer whether or not he spoke out of turn, and he never should have made a public statement saying that he could expand that program.
So then, you know, we move on to Ms.
Rice.
And so she kind of has a longer segment, but I am going to read it.
She says, so just one last question.
The Elizabeth Dole Foundation pointed out that the VA has taken several steps to address the persistent inconsistencies with implementing and operating the caregiver program at the regional local level, but that program still lacks a level of centralization.
I'm just curious, Mr.
Secretary, what steps are you taking to kind of centralize that as requested?
And Secretary Shulkin states, well, I shared that same concern, which is why I paused the program in April this year.
I said no more revocations until we are sure we have program oversight.
Meg Cabot, that leads it, was responsible for telling me when she was ready to start the program up again and with the proper program oversight.
And we believe we have good program oversight now, a consistent directive.
Is it perfect?
No, but it is a lot better than what it was.
But did she consult herself?
Yeah, exactly.
That's going to be my question.
Who she consulted?
What happened?
Well, and also, the Office of Inspector General did an audit and found that there was zero oversight of program management.
So she has no oversight.
No one's managing her.
She's not managing anything.
But she gave the all clear To start operating this program again.
The problem is, is 10 months from now, 10 months from this hearing, VA gets caught doing the same song and dance.
They are discharging again in huge numbers, to the point Congress gets involved, I think, that time, and they're just like, knock it off.
That happened in December of 2018.
Do we know how many?
You know, I think that there have been reports Maybe Quill Lawrence did an article?
I can't remember.
I would have to look.
Was it like hundreds or thousands?
Oh, I think it was probably thousands.
I would guess thousands.
There were some that they had discharged like almost 80 or 90% of their whole entire participants.
So...
Here's my thought really quick, Robin, before you continue.
Here we are in 2023, talking about the same program that has had continuous problems over and over and over again.
We have seen now, up from inception to 2018, thousands, not just on one occasion, But multiple occasions, hundreds and in some instances thousands of veterans booted out of a program, veterans and their caregivers, just ousted with seemingly no warning.
The only way that I have gathered, the only way that some of these families knew that they were out of the program is that they just didn't get a stipend on the first of the next month.
And then had to do the legwork to find out that they were no longer in the program.
No letter, no phone call, no visit, none of that.
Just ousted.
And the people...
Who are part of this program that continuously have problems, that were shut down by the Secretary, Congress has gotten involved and kind of slapped them on the wrist, and we're still having these issues after all this time.
And it seems to me the only one thing that is constant in this program is Meg Cabot.
And the Elizabeth Dole Foundation, I think, I don't know if they were there for the inception, but it seems like they came on a little bit later, around this time.
Other than that, personnel has changed, secretaries have changed, but this woman, who seemingly has all the puppet strings in her hand, is running this program, and it's failing.
It's failing veterans over and over again.
So my question, Robin, probably is too big for you to answer, but at what point, folks, is somebody, whether it's a group of us that get really loud, And be the squeakiest wheel that we can find to be.
Or somebody in our elected delegation.
Or somebody with some more power, I suppose is a good question.
Or a good term.
Gonna stop this bullshit.
Because it seems to be happening over and over and over again.
And with no end in sight.
The BS doesn't end.
It doesn't seem.
Until we get to 2025 maybe and then who knows what.
So for anybody that's watching this, think about that.
Like how can we get this information and these problems to the right people to make a change?
Because Richard Leonard and Robin Stitt can't walk up on Capitol Hill and start demanding people make changes We're going to be in a jail cell next to each other sharing hot pockets.
And so, I mean, I don't know, Robin.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I mean, it's just, it's every week that we talk about this, it seems to be the same issues, just different players.
But the only player that's constant is Meg Cabot.
Continue.
I digress.
So, Ms.
Rice says, so I lied.
One more quick question.
I totally support your position that there shouldn't be any revocations to people who currently have qualified for this service.
And Secretary Shulkin says, right.
Ms.
Rice says, going forward, though, if we were to make this legislative fix, they would not suffer.
The people who already have it would not suffer.
And he says, we would continue to support those that are eligible under the current criteria.
I don't think you can just pull the wool out of people that you have already made a commitment to.
And Ms.
Rice says, right?
We were scheduled to be discharged on October 1st of 2022.
Veteran Warriors lawsuit that required the VA to set aside A definition that we were all assessed under caused the VA to issue an interim final rule.
And in that interim final rule, they allowed legacy to stay on for three additional years.
That is not the commitment that I am reading about under oath that was given to Congress by former Secretary Shulkin.
So does that mean that the transcript that you're reading right now from that hearing is null and void because Secretary Shulkin is gone and we got a new guy and so we don't have to honor what was decided on in 2018?
Is that just completely goes by the wayside?
That seems to be how it is.
That seems to be what happened.
I think that there's probably two scenarios here, Robin, that could be possible.
One is that there is a lot more information that you or I or Veteran Warriors doesn't know about, which I find unlikely, because you guys have been right about everything so far.
You and then Veteran Warriors have been right, as far as I can tell.
Or...
There's treachery afoot.
And there are bigger problems going on.
I shouldn't say that there are bigger problems, because there is no bigger problem than disregarding veterans and their caregivers.
But there are also extremely big problems, potentially, That have to do with all kinds of other debauchery that has nothing to do with you and your husband, Robin, which is even more concerning.
Because that means that once again, there is a group of people that are...
Making it rich, they're gaining power, they're controlling people, whatever the case may be, on the backs of the people that they have swore to protect and to serve and to see to their well-being.
And that is super concerning to me.
It is concerning when veterans and caregivers have turned into a buzzword for funding.
Yes.
And the worst part about it is that nobody who's using this program has asked to be in the position that they're in to need it.
Bingo.
Right?
Like, your husband didn't ask to have the ailments or the disabilities or whatever it is that he has.
You didn't ask to have to give up your career to take care of him.
Although it's extremely noble and brave of you to do that.
Thank you for your support.
Well, yes, of course.
But now, we're going to just throw all that out.
We're not going to even recognize that or identify it because there's pockets to stuff with money and there's power to be had and there's control to be had.
And if I'm wrong, please, somebody who knows better, come on this show and tell me I'm wrong and why.
And I'd be happy to issue an apology to whoever needs one.
But it's extremely concerning to me.
Stop messing with all these folks.
Let them live out their days in peace.
I really hope that I'm wrong.
I hope that somebody comes on here and says, you're extremely wrong and prove to me why.
I hope that that's the case.
Right?
Hey guys, I want to take one second here to talk to you about Goldco.
Our friends over at Goldco have asked me to talk to you about how to back your IRA with up to $10,000 of free silver.
It's no secret anymore that our economy is a disaster.
Sleepy Joe and his cronies are doing the best they can to keep us all impoverished if they could.
So give Gold Co.
a call today, 855-920-3196.
That's 855-920-3196.
The value of our currency is going down at an alarming rate.
There is no time like the present.
To back your plan for retirement, your IRA with up to $10,000 of free silver or any other precious metals such as gold and silver.
So tell them The Richard Leonard Show sent you.
Call 855-920-3196.
Hey guys, welcome back here for the next segment.
Robin, so when we ended the last segment, we were talking about the Congressional hearing and former Secretary Shulkin and all that malarkey.
So let's move on from that.
What's next on the timeline?
Yes, so after the Congressional hearing, the Missions Act passed, and this required the VA to include veterans of all eras in a staggered fashion for the caregiver program.
And as I mentioned earlier, about 10 months after that Congressional hearing, They got caught kicking everybody out again.
So at the end of 2018, they issue another pause.
So this brings us into 2019.
So we're in February of 2019.
And the VSOs have been brought in to have listening sessions with the VA hosted by Meg Cabot.
And keep in mind, you know, there are a lot of good suggestions from a lot of different VSOs, and even some of the ones that I don't agree with that we're going to talk about today, they had some good recommendations on how to expand this program, but I don't have time to pat them on the back.
So we're going to kind of focus on some of the nitty or grittier stuff, but are you ready to listen to the VSOs?
I am, but before we get to that, really quick, let's just outline for people who may not know what VSOs are.
Folks, VSOs are veteran service organizations, so these are places like DAV, the American Legion, the VFWs, any of these non-profit or congressionally chartered organizations that advocate to the VA on behalf of any veteran that chooses to use their services.
Yes.
Sorry about that.
That's okay.
So I wish I had enough time to go through everything.
I don't.
I would recommend that you look these up on regulations.gov and you can look through them for yourself if they're still there.
Well, I would be willing to bet, Robin, that after this show, for sure, that they will be a lot tougher to find if they're still available at all.
Things tend to disappear.
So Meg Cabot, National Director of the Caregiver Support Program and the consultant for the program, Thank you all very much.
We would like to shift these particular topics.
These four topics, as I look at them, if we get them right, they will trickle down into policy that will move down into implementation.
This is where we would like to get your input.
And so they talk about serious injury tier, definition of supervision and protection, and the definition of ADL, activities of daily living.
And we know from the first episode that VA renamed all of these things for no good reason.
But she asks, Meg asks, should the definition of serious injury be changed?
And so here we're going to introduce a woman named Renee Bardorf.
She was the representative from the Wounded Warrior Project.
She says, I think yes, it should change from Wounded Warrior Project's perspective.
I'm not sure how serious injury should be defined, but it should be more clinical, and I would be happy to provide language from our folks for best business practices in the private sector.
One of the areas we have seen from post 9-11 veterans is how mental disorders are defined.
The post-9-11 generation's use of the caregiver support program, that's where we see there are people who abuse the system, or it is loosely defined in terms of someone making the determination as it relates to psychological injury.
I think we need to go into a more clinical definition.
So, two things.
Hasn't the Wounded Warrior Project kind of made it clear that invisible wound psychological injury is just as debilitating and significant as physical wounds?
Well, weren't they one of the trailblazers of that narrative?
Yes.
So why are we now restricting eligibility for a program that would, you know, give them a caregiver to assist with these injuries?
And second, really?
Are we really going to talk about abuse when y'all were caught like three years before that with a $500,000 salary for the CEO and there was, you know, alleged fraud for donor funding?
They asked that man to step down.
So we really want to talk about fraud?
Somebody wasn't watching their own bobber on that one.
No, I don't condone it.
I don't condone abuse or fraud, but seriously.
Anyway.
So then we get on to TIER. So the new program has a different stipend methodology.
So it used to be if you lived in certain locations, you would get a higher stipend or a lower stipend based on the cost of living.
So Adrian, keep that in mind, it says, Adrian Adesato from the Disabled American Veterans said, there are some places in the country where the payment is quite high, and it lends itself to some criticism.
So I want to close the loop on that.
But I think it's only like 400 people in the United States that have this higher stipend rate.
400 people.
But I know one of them.
And they said the cost of milk where they live is like almost over $10 a gallon.
Holy cow.
So, I mean, that extra money that they get for their stipend, I mean, it chews it up right away.
So, good job, sir.
You have effectively impoverished 400 people for the sake of making it look good on paper.
Well, hold on a second.
Hold on a second.
The stipend is based on location, yeah?
Right.
No, it used to be on location.
We're talking about expanding this program with new eligibility and regulations.
They changed it.
Now it is a base standard pay rate.
Everybody gets the same, depending on what level you're on.
There's no more locality pay.
Well, okay, so at the time of this, it was based on location.
The fact that there were families receiving a much higher stipend isn't their fault.
That discussion belongs with inflation and the government's spending money.
It has everything to do with everything else but the fact that they live in a location where milk is $10 plus a gallon.
That's absolutely asinine to me.
So he also says that the general caregiver program is underutilized and that more pre-9-11s should use it while they wait for the PCAFC, the stipend program, to open up.
And Meg says, part of correcting the underutilization lies with the VSOs.
She says, I would ask all of you in your marketing materials and communications with your constituents to indicate that this is not the only way VA recognizes caregivers.
And like, that's tired old line again.
It just, it gets old trying to toss us into the general program and like, we don't want it.
We don't want it.
You don't get to call my work volunteer work.
It's not volunteer.
Right.
Are the people that care for veterans at VA facilities volunteers?
No.
Do those people go to work for no paycheck?
Just be out of the goodness of their hearts?
I think that they do go there out of the goodness of their hearts because they certainly aren't getting rich working for the VA. I'm really glad that I wasn't in.
It's probably a good reason why I'm not invited to things like this.
Right?
So Meg Pabbitt says that she will meet with Dr.
Stone next week to discuss all that is talked about in the listening session.
He's the acting undersecretary, well he was the undersecretary for health, acting undersecretary.
Renee Bardorf says, I think Dr.
Stone needs to know that the VSOs believe this is a model to be replicated and that when it comes to his work on the Hill, he would be much better positioned if we were able to have as much information as possible about his program.
And so I want to know, is she speaking for all VSOs when she says that?
Because I know that I can think of one VSO that rang the bell on this and said, restricting this program with these eligibility criteria is wrong and most of the participants will be gone.
And, you know, we've seen that over 90% were denied and discharged.
So is she talking about all the VSOs when she says this?
That this is a good model to replicate?
Well, I guess I don't know.
I mean, you could have to have been in the room to see the reactions.
I would assume that no, she was not addressing or talking about all of them.
I would hope so.
She says, I think the reason, you know, I think that the reason why we never will ever see them say that this program has failed is because they sat there in this room and wrote these regulations with them, with the VA. They're just as much responsible as anybody that put pen to paper and actually wrote the legal language out.
Renee Bardorf even says, there are many who will be dropped from the program if they are as tight as what we propose.
I mean, she even admitted it before they were even written.
And she also says, we have buy-in, and we are less likely to have heartburn with something that we, together, have created.
My recommendation is that you provide us with the definition of serious injury, you assign us tasks, and we reconvene on that.
Okay, and so what happened with that?
Do they have any Tums?
Like, I got jokes for days.
Do they have heartburn yet?
Because I do.
Yeah, a long time ago.
So did they ever reconvene?
You know, they did.
They...
They reconvened in March and April and May and they wrote the regulations and they published the, I think it was in July, July 30th, I believe, 2019, the interim or the proposed final rule was published.
Or maybe that was when it was finalized.
But yes, they didn't meet again.
So in order to get to a restricted expansion program, VA hired a contractor.
Meg says, one of the things we are doing is we have engaged a contractor to help us put together an eligibility protocol.
And I think that the contractor is Atlas Research.
Weird.
You've spoke about them a little bit.
I don't know if you remember them.
Yeah, isn't that where Meg went when there was a mean tweet about her?
So Meg left after the VSO listening sessions.
So she helped write the regulations and then she left.
And at Atlas Research, she was a researcher.
And it's extremely interesting.
One of the research studies she did was called The Face of the Program.
How local clinicians shape decisions about eligibility for a national caregiver support program in the USA. And the conclusion is that discretion is important.
Interdisciplinary teams can help mitigate potential harm to therapeutic relationships.
Discretion allows for innovation.
And this work has implications for setting policy in other programs.
Do you remember the RAISE Council I mentioned earlier from the congressional hearing?
This caregiver program is kind of what they're trying to model the national policy or the national strategy after, or what I think that they did.
I think that they published that actually.
But so what I'm trying to say is that her research now supports the agenda of removing the primary care provider out of the equation.
So they operated with these clinical eligibility assessors for years, and then when they put it into a final regulation, she then left after, you know, cart before the horse, and did research that justifies these regulations.
It makes me feel like this has been a very well thought out plan.
At least that's the way it seems.
If I was a Benton woman, I would say that this was organized.
This was organized and orchestrated, I would, yes sir.
And so that leads me to wonder, Robin, about why.
Why would anybody want to just completely destroy this program the way that it seems that they have tried to do and are effectively still trying to do?
Why?
What is it about veterans who stay at home and are being cared for by their loved ones?
Why is that a threat to them?
And why do they have to make these changes to seemingly disqualify you right out of the program?
Because, you know, under the new qualification standards, folks aren't really eligible.
And so what about...
This program and this activity of caregivers who are loved ones taking care of veterans, why are they a target?
Why are you and your husband and all these countless other caregivers and their vet, why are they targets?
Why are you a target?
Is what I'd really love to ask them.
I read a RAND report one time done by Elizabeth Dole.
The Elizabeth Dole Foundation, it said that caregiving is, I think, a 13 or possibly a 15 billion dollar industry.
So I believe that if you pay the family caregiver, that money is not going into a corporation's pocket.
I mean, 13 to 15 billion dollars, that's a lot of money.
This is a pretty big industry, don't you think?
Absolutely.
It's almost as big as the NFL. And so, let me throw this out there.
And I don't know the concrete number, but I think, if I am remembering somewhat correctly, that in the last year or two, alone, the United States of America has given places like the Ukraine $15 to $18 billion.
And I don't want to get off in the weeds and be political, Robin, but just for context, we've given billions and billions of dollars towards a cause that we arguably have no business being a part of.
And it's not just the Ukraine, but so much other stuff that we as a society and as a government waste money on.
And again, now, with the caregiver program and so many other initiatives by the VA, money's the issue.
I read an article just recently.
Again, I don't want to get too far off, but I read an article recently, and I think you and I were talking about it, about how there's going to be this means test and possibly if you're a veteran that receives VA disability and you make a certain amount of income, you're no longer eligible for your disability benefits.
What?
But we're going to send money all over the world.
For what?
For what?
And again, the veterans in this country are now the guinea pigs, once again.
And now when there's problems because we've overspent and we've overextended ourselves, the veterans, the VA, veterans are the ones who are going to take the hit.
Not only did we volunteer to defend this country, but now we're going to get screwed over because our government overspent and overextended themselves.
It's just...
Maybe I should run for office and hopefully get elected and just start bitching out all these people.
Maybe it would help, maybe not.
I don't know.
I'm sorry, Robin.
But this into perspective, you talk about the money that's thrown away and I spoke of the 13 to 15 billion...
I mean, it's been quoted a few different ways.
13 to 15 billion dollars that we are saving...
The workforce.
The program's operating on 1.9 billion.
1.9 versus 13.
That's a big cost savings.
And as we went over, and I believe the very first episode, how much cost savings could we have if we actually trimmed the fat on this program to begin with?
This program is so much cheaper and more desirable, in my opinion, than the commercial caregiving options that the VA has.
And I don't think that they should, you know, do away with the commercial caregiving options because not everybody has a family caregiver that's equipped, you know, up here or here to take care of a veteran.
But for the folks that want that, why has our choice been taken away?
Yeah.
Absolutely.
And in the grand scheme of things, I think that we talked, maybe it was last week, or maybe it was the first week, 60,000 veterans, so 120,000 people, give or take some?
No, there's only 30.
I think there's like 30 or 40,000 veterans in the program, so that'd be 60 to 80.
Okay, so even less, 60 to 80 individuals.
Okay.
60,000 to 80,000 individuals that are taking advantage of this program, but yet almost $2 billion to fund the program.
I think that you're right, Robin.
I bet that there is multiple ways to trim the fat on this program.
I don't think that caregivers are expecting to be rich The VA is going to make them rich.
I think that they're just expecting to have the crap that they need to take care of their veterans.
I mean, I don't know.
Are you looking, Robin, to make $200,000 a year taking care of your husband?
It doesn't seem that way to me.
Not at all.
You know, and I was actually looking up something the other day.
Someone was talking about a medical support assistant had done their eligibility assessment for the caregiver program.
You know, I look at that and I looked that up to see exactly what kind of credentials that kind of person has, and I looked at their pay grade.
And they get paid more than a top-tier caregiver does.
And they're basically a receptionist.
Do you mean like an MSA at the hospital?
No.
So when I go to see my mental health care provider, the lady that checks me in to tell my therapist that I'm there was making decisions and eligibility decisions on somebody's file?
How in the hell is that okay?
That's like a GS5 level job.
Caregivers pay GS4, top tier.
Okay, see now I didn't know that particular statistic.
GS4 step one, grade four step one.
Well, see now instantly I start sweating.
That's ridiculous.
That's absolutely asinine.
The MSAs at the hospital, folks, for those of you who don't know, they're needed, right?
Like, these folks are needed in the medical facility because they, I mean, they set our appointments, they let the people know we're there, you know, and they got to deal with disgruntled people.
But here in Minneapolis, a GS5, I think, is like $19,000.
It's not a livable wage.
And Robin, you're saying that you guys get paid less than that.
Top tier caregivers get paid less than a person who checks me into my appointment.
And I hate to make it sound like those people are not important because they are.
And I'll tell you what, when I'm making appointments, I appreciate somebody who's attentive and is able to fulfill their job well.
But this is asinine.
Robin, we got like two minutes left in the segment.
What else do we need to get to before we end the segment quickly?
That was, you know, other than saying that the same person is creating the policy, researching said policy, consulting themselves for the program, and then implementing the program, it's the same person.
Meg Cabot.
Yeah, she holds all those titles.
She did the research after.
And this is just one study.
I don't have time to go over all of them.
She's done many studies.
There's a lot of research that gets done at the VA. Oh, yeah, that's a whole other series of shows.
It is.
And all the research is used is evidence-based research, and it creates evidence-based policy.
And it's even quoted in the Federal Advisory Committee meeting minutes.
It's quoted often that Everything that they do will be backed up by this evidence-based research.
But how trustworthy is it when the same people that are benefiting are the ones doing the research?
Yeah, I don't know that there's a whole lot of checks and balances going on with the research.
They're not adhering to any, like, stern ethical guidelines.
And I'll tell you what, folks, this is why things like this are important to everybody in this country, because the VA conducts these research projects.
Because it's easy.
It's easy to get to our records because veterans, it's a government agency.
It's easy for all this stuff to be seen all through the government.
But these are the type of research projects that create policy, as Robin said, that affects everybody in this country.
Medical initiatives that are researched and then implemented at the VA are done to be implemented nationwide, even in the private medical healthcare field.
And I refuse to believe that there's no truth to that.
We're the easy targets.
Hey folks, and welcome back here to the last segment.
We have about four and a half-ish minutes, and so I'm sorry that we're ending on a short segment, but we had a lot of info.
Robin, I believe that we need to end with a call to action, just like we had the last two weeks.
And so if you're comfortable with that, let us have it.
We're here listening.
My call to action is this, and I'm talking to the viewers just as much as I'm talking to you, Richard.
Why did the big VSOs and the orgs recommend these changes, and what are they doing now to advocate to repair these damages?
Spend this week reaching out to your VSOs.
Ask them for proof, not their word.
We've seen how good their words are.
Ask for proof what they're doing to work for our best interest.
We haven't heard outrage from these big organizations that the VA has even done anything wrong to us.
The only voice we've heard be firm with the VA is veteran warriors.
You know, guys, they can't always carry our weight.
Sometimes we have to stand up and we have to speak out for ourselves.
And I'll say it louder for the people in the back.
Guys, you do not stand up now.
There will not be a program for us come 2025.
Meg Cabot is still full throttle, behind the wheel.
She is in control of the regulations.
She's in control of the implementation.
Stop being afraid.
We have nothing else to lose.
They can't kick us out again.
We don't need to fear retaliation.
Let's stand up together.
We can make change if we all show up in the masses and let them know that we will not accept this behavior anymore and that we demand better.
And guys, stay tuned.
We've got a lot more.
Very well said.
And I agree with you, Robin.
I agree with you a thousand percent.
Folks, anybody that's watching that is a caregiver or a veteran or a family member of a caregiver, any of those scenarios, this is not a time to be afraid.
This is not a time to sit back in the cut and just hope that change comes.
As we discussed earlier in the show Through the timeline from inception to current time, there has been a force working against the caregiver and the veteran.
That force goes by the name of Meg Cabot.
And Meg, if you watch this, I'm sorry if you're offended, but the facts seem to be the facts.
And if those are untrue facts, which would make them not facts...
Then speak out and correct us.
But at the end of the day, 2025 is coming.
And that means that hundreds and thousands of veterans and caregivers and their families are going to be just left without.
And so you may be thinking that this is just something that is never going to change because we're not loud enough, we're not big enough, we don't have enough power, and the VA is just going to do what the VA does.
And maybe you're right, but how do you know if you don't try?
And anybody else watching who is not a caregiver or not associated with a veteran or anything like that, You can still help.
You can still be vocal.
You can still make the call.
You can still advocate for these amazing people who have given up their lives, their careers to take care of their loved ones.
At the core of this country, even though it's extremely polarized right now and there's all kinds of extra BS going on that makes us really question whether or not we are still as great of a country as we used to be, at the core we are.
And so this is the time to stand up and show that.
And to show that we are supportive of each other and we're willing to take care of each other, but we can't do it just Robin Stitt and Richard Leonard and veteran warriors.
There has to be more people.
We have to be louder than we've ever been before.
There's true value in this.
I'm not in the program, but it's extremely important to me that some kind of change comes to ensure that these men and women are taken care of the best way possible.
And for them, it's at home with their loved one taking care of them.
And also, it's a lot cheaper for our government.
▲
Export Selection