If you were offered a one-on-one with the Newly Elected POTUS, what would you try to change about the military?

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 12:41:35 -0500

RP Members be Professional and think about the one thing you would ask the Newly Elected POTUS to change in for the military services?

I would ask POTUS to consider an overhaul the VA. Here is Whtie Paper that Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS help champion - Combination of restructuring the VA and TriCare benefits and health Coverage. I'll post a White Paper below as a response below! Feedback Please?

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Feb 6 at 2016 12:42 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 12:42:48 -0500

Very good question COL Mikel J. Burroughs. I would let the POTUS know that believers throughout this nation are praying for wisdom for him/her.
1st I would ask the POTUS to pray for wisdom as he/she establishes the cabinet and staff.
2nd I would encourage the President to pick civilian overseers of the DoD and military services who respect and honor the military and hopefully that many would have served in the military or their spouses did.
3rd I would tell the President that the POTUS needs to have honest military leaders who are not yes ,men or women and that he should seek good counsel early in the decision process.
4th I would encourage teh POTUS to treat all citizens with respect and not to pander to particular groups. That would include comparable pay raises for military and civil servants throughout the administration term in office.
5th. I would encourage the President to streamline the healthcare process in the military medical system, the indian affairs hospital system and in the VA medical system. These systems should be distinct and never lumped together for easy budget cutting.

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Feb 6 at 2016 12:44 PM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 12:44:41 -0500

Here is the the White Paper:

12 October 2015

Congressman Chris Gibson
1708 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Attn: Stephanie Valle, Chief of Staff

Re: Proposed White Paper Reorganization of Department of Veterans Affairs

Dear Ms. Stephanie Valle:

First, let me introduce myself, my name Colonel (retired) Mikel J. Burroughs. I’ve spent the last 37 years of my life serving in the United States Army on Active Duty, in the National Guard, Deployed, and in the United States Army Reserves. Secondly, a small group of concerned veterans headed up by Sergeant Aaron Kennedy, United States Marine Corps and others who are connected on a website called RallyPoint decided to prepare some idea(s) and proposals on how or what the reorganization of the Department of Military Affairs might look like, particularly in the healthcare portion of the organization.

We have attached a ten (10) page proposed reorganization white paper for the Department of Veteran Affairs that we would like for you and your staff to review in hopes that it will spark some interest and additional questions. We realize that an undertaking of this magnitude in attempting to reorganize the Department of Veterans Affairs is a far more complicated project than just ten (10) pages. We are very interested in your thoughts along the proposed high level approach we are recommending.

Our goal is to peak enough interest that maybe the Congressman will want to dig into this deeper and champion legislation to make the recommendations to congress for reorganization of the Department of Veteran Affairs healthcare and lead the way to fix the continuous problems facing the organization today. We welcome your feedback, negative or positive, and we stand ready to answer any additional questions you may have regarding our outline of proposed changes.

Respectively,

Mikel J. Burroughs
COL (Ret)

White Paper Draft v2.3 (10/7/2015)

Overview

Perhaps the simplest way to look at the Department of Veterans Affairs (DeptVA) is based on the "Eras" of Veteran that it currently serves. In modern times, there are two major eras vying for resources, which can best be described as stressing the system at the seams. Those Eras are the Vietnam Era Veterans, and the Gulf War Era. http://www.benefits.va.gov/pension/wartimeperiod.asp

The Vietnam Era has a significant aging veteran population (estimated at between 54-80~) which places them in the range of major health concerns because of life expectancy, as well as those that are era specific. The more modern veterans, though younger are enrolling at greater rates contributing to an increased enrolled & patient population for the DeptVA.

Over the last decade, although the total number of living veterans has decreased dramatically over the last 13 years (down 17%), the number of VA Enrolled Veterans has increased (up 77%).
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43579.pdf

This trend should continue for the next 5-10 years as our Vietnam era veterans reach life expectancy (death), and we see the former Draft Model shift to the All-Volunteer Force Model (AVF) at which point there should be a (significant) decrease in total veteran population. However, this does not take into account increase potential recruiting for conflicts in the future.

Of note however is the percentage of enrolled veterans has steadily increased, resulting in more patients even though the total population has been decreasing over the last decade. In essence, we are approaching equilibrium, but on an upturn, not a downturn. The system will continue to be stressed for at least five more years, and in approximate fifteen, we will see a similar stressing which will last twice as long as the one we are experiencing now, because our Gulf War, Contingency, & OIF/OEF Veterans will be reaching the age our Vietnam Era vets are at now.

Assessment

Simply put, the DeptVA was never designed to be this big. It has scaled past the point of efficiency. As we saw in the post WWI era, the WWII DeptVA had to be restructured to meet the needs of the modern vet. As America has gotten bigger, and our Veteran population has grown larger, and the services we are providing them has gotten more comprehensive, we are seeing a “ripping at the seams” of the current model’s capability.

The DeptVA needs a restructuring. However, this restructuring does not need to be nearly as comprehensive as the one from WWI to WWII, as most of the ground work was already done, when it was decentralized. The DeptVA is currently decentralized into several regions throughout the country, with each Region acting semi-autonomously. Within each region there are a variety of Regional Offices (50+), Medical Centers (151), Outpatient Clinics (820), and Storefront “Vet Centers” (300~). These facilities service the existing (and future) veterans, and can best be compared to Naval Vessels, as opposed to Units.

There have what can only be called countless reports of corruption in various facilities throughout the Nation, as the organization has been pushed past capacity. We have asked it to do too much with too little, and like any machine, when stressed, parts will fail. However, corruption may be a misnomer. Each of these major incidents lacks the key element of personal gain which is truly essential for that descriptor. Yes, there is a loss of integrity, and policy violation, but it is a systemic breakdown as opposed to true corruption.

This lends it more to an Oversight and Accountability problem, which is resulting in Administrative symptoms.

This theory seems the most reasonable in that we are seeing random problems throughout locales, and some areas have strengths in what other areas have weaknesses. Were we to apply the scientific method, we would not be able to specifically isolate what is causing any one issue, other than people.

However, the common thread appears to be resource management, and the demand to do more with less. In essence stresses on the system, resulting in bad judgment by people in management, with varying effects (decisions).

Proposal

We started from the theory that the military (et al) has a mostly if not fully functional system in place to support the service members (henceforth referred to as veterans for ease) akin to that of the DeptVA.

"As such, why can't the Department of Veterans Affairs 'mirror' the system currently in place by the services?"

Without conducting a major overhaul of the DeptVA, what would be the simplest means of making the two systems virtually identical? The DeptVA is approximately the size of the Navy (320,000 Personnel vs. 326,000 Active Duty) when it comes to personnel, therefore we can use that as a baseline for personnel matters. Additionally, because of the Region & Facility structure, the parallels become more and more similar as they are explored. Therefore, we imagined the DeptVA as a Nominal Navy where each Group of Regions is a Fleet, and each Facility was a Vessel within the Fleet. Once the DeptVA is looked at through this metaphor, the concept of treating each facility (vessel) as independent commands takes shape.

Note: The United States Navy is currently divided into seven (7) distinct Fleets or Geographic (operational) Regions. By separating the DeptVA Regions into a similar seven (7) Fleets, we can directly mirror the structure of the USN, using a Fleet Admiral (O-10) as head of each region, and officers of lesser grade in billets below.

But for simplicity’s sake, we approached it from a Command Staff aspect. Replace the Director and Command Staff at DeptVA facilities with (Uniformed) Commissioned Officers on a one-for-one (1:1) basis. These officers could be drawn from the US Public Health Service (USPHS), or another branch and substitute the existing SES/GS/GM employees for officers of similar grade. In essence, rather than having Federal Civil Servants, we would have Commissioned Officers who are directly accountable to the SecVA & SecHHS (& the President) as the lead management team of each major facility.

The goal would be to change the Command Philosophy. By having someone who is directly accountable, who can be immediately replaced, and who can hold those below him accountable, we are able to correct issues as they arise rather than let them fester until they become public issues which are reactionary. Additionally, this allows a much smoother Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and Congressional Inquiry process, which provides significant increases in Oversight at all levels.

We mention using the USPHS officers to fill the role for this specifically because of the USHHS' (parent organization) mission of Health in the US. The DeptVA would still retain all Administrative Control (ADCON), however the USPHS (or office thereof) would be Operational Control (OPCON) of the sites reporting to the SecVA.

This should begin at the Regional Level (Graphic attached), and work downward to create a hierarchal structure as opposed to the current “feudal” or “fiefdom” model that exists currently. As Regional Directors/Commanders would be “Flag Officers” (SES converted to USPHS Admirals), and location Directors/Commanders would “Commanding Officers” akin to how our Navy is arranged. The size of the facility, scope of operations/responsibilities, would dictate the rank of the commander, but in general it would be a direct conversion from equivalent SES/GM/GS grade.

We are not advocating an increase/decrease of personnel numbers, nor are we saying that existing “good” employees should be removed. However, the US government (et al) has a variety of programs that can be used to develop these officers in short order including: Transferring medical officers & administrators from other services, direct commission programs, recalling reservists & retirees, and increasing the size of USPHS while reducing civil servant structure.

Furthermore, as there are existing Regions in place, a test-bed program can be set up at Regional or even Facility level which allows limited or widespread adoption.

This corrects the issue with Oversight & Accountability, but does not address the major symptoms of Administration which appears to be the most prominent issue arising currently.

For that, a better method of hand-off needs to occur between the Department of Defense (DoD et al) and the DeptVA. As it stands, both systems currently use independent and separate systems, which are funneled through the National Archives & Records Administrations Branch. This is a major flaw in the system. This is the logjam between the two Departments. To address this, there must be a multi-phase approach to records management.

The first phase is recognizing that we are currently using an inefficient and outdated transfer system to get medical documentation from one system to another, as it stands, when a Service Member leaves the Military their Medical Records (Medical & Dental) is transferred to the National Archives system, and then it must be transferred back to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) before it can be utilized. This is an unnecessary step in the modern era of medical record keeping.

Therefore, the first step must be in weaning off the current system of using the National Archives for Veterans transferring to the DeptVA. Rather than having all medical records go through a centralized process (National Archives), it should be decentralized based on location of ETS/EAS/Retirement. Upon exodus from military, the service members’ medical & dental records go to the closest medical facility (or Regional Office) to their final duty station. This would not affect the Service Record Book transition to the National Archive System.

Although the long-term goal is having a fully electronic record tracking system, this will reduce general administrative burden at onset of process, saving both time & money. As veterans’ records become “inactive” (Death of Veteran or Predetermined amount of time), the records can be shifted to the National Archives for final storage (as opposed to initial storage). This turns them into historical documents, as opposed to medical records.

Note: As an example, someone EASing from MCB Quantico would have their Medical Files transferred to DC Medical Center until it is needed by another location, at which point normal Medical transfer procedures will occur, just like in the civilian world.

The second phase is identifying that “Military Medicine” and the VHA have different specific goals, which must be reconciled. Military Medicine is designed to retain & maintain Operational Capability, while VHA is after service care. This does not mean the goals cannot be merged. The best way to do this is by slowly expanding VHA into the Base/Location Level (as opposed to Unit Level) Military Medicine programs. In essence, evolving Base Medical Facilities into VHA sites, creating a seamless transition when the Veteran leaves service.

This requires (long-term) replacement of Medical Officers & Medical Staff on a one for one (1:1) basis with USPHS staff at the location level. As these are generally non-deployable or specialized personnel, it will not affect unit readiness. Furthermore, by shifting operational control (OPCON) to USPHS personnel, we remove an additional logjam in the bureaucratic process. We now have “VHA” Doctors involved in the process “birth to grave”

This of course will require technology upgrades which should be done on a Region by Region basis, to “match” the existing Military Medicine infrastructure. By having a common infrastructure with the originating system (DoD) the process becomes more streamlined, reducing further backlogs. This can be done during the normal infrastructure upgrades (lifecycle), with a zero sum effect on cost. Essentially, we are replacing & upgrading systems as normal, but choosing to marry them up so they are better able to communicate with existing infrastructure (which is fully compatible across Region lines).

The third phase is acknowledging that we have a program that works very well for a subset of our Veterans, specifically our Retirees. This is the TriCare (Various Levels). This “(supplemental) insurance” plan can be expanded to cover all Veterans. It presents administrative challenges, but none are insurmountable.

First is the issuance of Identification. As “most” veterans’ exodus after a single term (4 years), and still have obligated service, they fall under the Individual Ready Reserve rules. They can be issued an IRR ID Card (Geneva Convention Card, Reservist). Expanding this program to the remaining Veterans, in lieu of using a VHA benefits card (with appropriate “tag”) would again reduce overall administration, as well as provide a de facto Medical Benefits Card. Furthermore, as the current IRR ID Card is a “Common Access Card” (CAC), it can be used for security credentials when accessing the government system. This adds additional layers of security to one of our largest Privacy Targets (21 Million Potential Targets as current).

Veterans “could” be annotated on a Tricare Copper/Aluminum/Tin (Descriptor/Color pending) program schedule by default, which in turn would allow them to schedule care through the VHA system, and receive Referrals for outside care just like those participating in TriCare (Various Level). This would in effect replace the VA Choice program. Billing for outside care would be handled at the TriCare level, further reducing burden on the VHA system, and mirroring what exists in Military Medicine.

Finally, is working with the ever increasing staffing shortfalls. The most common presented concern is the perception of “doing more with less.” As the population of Veterans that the DeptVA services increases, this concern will continue even through the lull period in the coming years, and will increase exponentially when we encounter the next overlap of eras battling for recognition within the system.

This is the most complex problem, and is the result of the centralized hiring system used by the Federal Civil Service, or the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). This organization is very good at identifying generalized needs and filling them, however it has difficulty filling specialized needs like medical care.

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-15-03063-511.pdf

To help alleviate this, we suggest the use of Reserve Medical Officers (USPHS) and augmenting the VHA with Medical Professionals who have remaining Military Service Obligation (MSO). Reservists have been a longstanding means of reinforcing military units in time of need and crisis. By using this methodology on the proposed (mirrored) Military Medicine system, they can expand and contract to support Regions and Facilities as needed.

Additionally, as they are Military Medical Officers (vice Civilian Doctors), there are tuition reimbursement concepts, monetary incentives, retirement benefits, inter-service transfer options, and obligated service ideas that can be applied which are not normally available. Conceptually, these officers would drill one month per year to maintain status.

By adding this additional layer of personnel, who is outside the OPM system, the SecVA has the ability to identify hotspots as they are arising, and correct them before they become major issues.

Conclusion

Despite prophesies of doom, the Department of Veterans Affairs is not truly broken. It does have major concerns which are directly related to scale. These are readily apparent, now, because of the influx of multiple eras of veterans competing for limited resources as well as technological limitations, and the need to revisit the existing structure of the bureaucracy.

Over the next decade, the situation will continue to boil over, and then we will experience a lull, which will give law-makers and administrators approximately one decade to revamp and refine the existing system to meet the needs of the next generation of veterans. It is paramount that we begin planning immediately to take advantage of this lull, lest we repeat this current situation again, but with a much larger influx of veterans, and a much longer stressing period than the one we are experiencing now.

The best way we can do that is mirroring a functional system, a la the Military Medical system, and by providing oversight and accountability similar to that system. By leveraging the positives of this system, and using a phased approach over the next few years, we can gradually build a comprehensive system that meets the reality of existing infrastructure as well as veteran needs.

Eligible Wartime Periods - Pension

Wartime Veteran Pension

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Feb 6 at 2016 12:48 PM

MCPO Roger Collins — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 12:48:44 -0500

You mean immediately after firing Ass, oops, Ash Carter?

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Feb 6 at 2016 1:05 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 13:05:23 -0500

Stop fighting a linear war and go after them. Stop using our imperial powers so much. Be a war president, not an administrative paper tiger. Stop ruining the morale of the troops.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Feb 6 at 2016 1:05 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 13:05:23 -0500

I invite him to learn from the outside.

The military is good at a great many things. We are generally not efficient at anything. If you want "change" or "efficiency" do not look for it within the military. You are going to have to hire outside, and drag us kicking and screaming. Then 2 years later, it will be like "we have always done it that way." However, if after 4 years... people are still complaining about it... chances are there is a real problem. "We're the Experts at making bad things work, with next to nothing." If we can't do it, no one can.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 6 at 2016 1:05 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 13:05:36 -0500

Mr/Ms. President Elect, The U.S. is facing unprecedented peer to peer regional competition in critical theaters of operation. Cutbacks have created gaps in our defense capabilities. What is your plan to close the gap between where we are currently at and where we need to be to adequately protect American interests on the mainland and abroad?

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Feb 6 at 2016 2:09 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 14:09:39 -0500

I wouldn't bother with the meeting; the POTUS is a hard-left ideologue, closed to anything other than his ideological preconceptions. It would be like having a religious dialogue with ISIS.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Feb 6 at 2016 2:30 PM

LTC Jason Mackay — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 14:30:04 -0500

It would take congress to fix, but I would like to see concurrent receipt over turned so that retirement and VA compensation goes to those who need it vice this Rube Goldberg, pay you and take it back and taxable vs non taxable fend shui that takes a CPA to figure out.

I would also want an external validation of where the VA puts facilities. There are over 100,000 veterans in Colorado Springs and they build a VA Hospital out in the plains in Aurora. I am sure there are hundreds of other examples.

Do we need a VA to do treatment? Can't we pass that to private health care and allow them to write it off their taxes. We are talking .5% of the population. Use the VA as an Ombudsman to ensure private healthcare is providing the requisite treatment on a punitive basis.

I would try and instill the virtue of fighting declared wars. We are hopelessly decoupled from the American People. Declaring a war through Congress closes all the political escape routes. You are either in or out and need to be accountable later on, vice blaming a President, a SECDEF, or a Strategy (or lack there of). Resolve is the largest strategic enabler. People need to understand we are going to break stuff and kill people. Calling something what it is, is a start:war.

Again, Congressional, sequestration has to go. It goes back to resolve. Are we going to resource services or not? Senior leaders can then prioritize over the long term, vice guessing about the future.

Until we get fusion to happen at room temperature in something the size of a beer cooler and get composite armor the same weight per volume as balsa wood, the Army will need equipment that is big, heavy, and lethal to dominate and deter enemies. They will need other stuff that is fast and light to pop out of nowhere, knock somebody out and disappear. We will need great Americans to be ready to serve. The Air Force needs to be redirected to pay attention to the specks on the ground and their requirements like intra theater lift and close air support or stop fighting the Army for those assets and let them do it. The Army will have stuff that is big and heavy - get it there and sustain it as required. The world is 78% water, but 100% of people live on the green and brown parts. War is about people yielding to our will. The Navy impacts the daily life of people in that they help secure the global commons, allowing trade. Those costs to security, loss and risk are passed to consumers. We need enough Navy to do that, support the Army and Marines, defend themselves in brown-green-blue environs, and compliment Air Force capabilities. All of this is predicated on fighting "away games" so we don't have a 7th game final showdown at home. All of that is sustained at a cost that makes it effective and only selectively efficient. Embrace it and move on.you have to pay to play.

Connection to the people we serve is a mix of being a representative sample of who we serve and presence across the spectrum of those we serve. The regional mega base concept needs to go. As the number of congressional districts we are in decreases, there goes our leverage to operate, be supported, and be resourced. Rockaway NJ, Clarksville TN, and Oakgrove KY are great examples of connection and support. We need a tended and positive connection to those we serve. Connection will engender better support and desire to serve. Focus on away games will also demand OCONUS bases and presence

The Nation State system is our best shot at international peace and stability. Compelling nations to control their borders and security is best for all. Allowing lawlessness and havens for terrorists, Pirates, cyber criminals, etc degrades peace, stability and commerce. They should be hunted and killed. Borders need to be controlled (doesn't mean a wall or a moat, everyone calm down, it is a measure of governance) We need a foreign policy that drives that. Transnational bad actors destabilize.

We need domestic policy to return manufacturing and capital investment to the U.S. Belief in purely services, lack of vocational training, and everyone goes to college isbhurtingbthe nation. We need a mix of thinkers, builders, spear carriers, and doers to make this all work. They need an environment that supports that. We also need a strategic industrial capacity study to ensure we can mobilize to protect the nation and honor our international commitments. I think we will find we may no longer be the Arsenal of Democracy.

We need to decrease the width in the partisan aisle in congress. We are getting nothing done as people are busy polarizing, being offended, tending pet projects, and generally not serving America. Much of our time is dominated by non issues. Against abortion? Don't get one. Against guns? Don't get one. Against Gay marriage? Don't marry a gay guy then. There, we fixed it. Let's get on with governing the nation.

We have a populous who generally can't pass a urinalysis to get a CDL, serve in public trust, operate a bulldozer, nor defend the nation. If they could pass, they are either unable physically, morally, or mentally to do so. We have a national problem.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 6 at 2016 2:45 PM

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 14:45:45 -0500

It is hard to say since I am one of those nut jobs that thinks the POTUS should have served in the military. I think you need to know first had what you are sending the brave men and women of our military into. If you have seen or felt the lose many have you might not be so quick to go to war. And I mean the real military not the ones who took a press secretary with them to Vietnam. P.S. When you do open the can of whoop ass it is not to be the police of the country. Just my two cents.

Response by SFC Joseph McCausland made Feb 6 at 2016 4:04 PM

SFC Joseph McCausland — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 16:04:43 -0500

First a "Win" strategy - If we enter into a conflict we must have a clear and precise beginning and end goal. Next the "rules of engaging the enemy" have to give our military the advantage.. not wait until they are fired upon first. Lastly, NO women in direct combat specialties..
This is no time for "equal opportunity" or the feminist movement..."This IS War!

Response by SSG Jerry Eidson made Feb 6 at 2016 4:41 PM

SSG Jerry Eidson — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 16:41:02 -0500

Making the process for retired personnel to come back to active status to fill shortages a whole lot easier!

Response by SPC George Rudenko made Feb 6 at 2016 10:21 PM

SPC George Rudenko — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 22:21:47 -0500

Pass a law banning direct contact between politicians and General/Admiral staff. Politicians, motivated by PAC contributions by big corporate business tech and manufacturing often force military to get sh!T it doesn't need. Uniforms suck, too many aircraft with no pilots or missiles. Oh, and there was that whole Bradley fighting vehicle thing. UGH

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Feb 6 at 2016 10:41 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 22:41:46 -0500

Sir this is a hard question. I say this being to almost ALL politicians we're just pawns to get them elected and once sworn in, Big (whatever) takes over and they pretty much pull the strings behind the scenes making us an "expendable" item with a definite "use by date".
If I had 10 minutes with him/her I'd ask what language are they speaking? I'll be told English of course. I'd then ask, why is that? I'd be told because America was founded by men from England. I would then respectfully correct him and tell him to look at the list of the dead from EVERY war. I'd inform him that THEY are the reason you speak English not because of the founding fathers. I'd tell him a short story about the lions and the sheep making sure he understands that America herself represents the sheep, and those of us who do our duty, day in and day out, are the Lions who keep her safe. We're not asking for rewards, money, recognition from anyone short of our peers, or some trinket that means nothing 10 minutes after he puts it around your neck. I'd tell him to take care of the Lions. Ensure they have the best healthcare, their families are taken care of, and they have a home that wants them when their duty is done. They are battered and tired. Their numbers are dwindling, and the morale isn't high. And the sheep are getting restless. This might sound callous, but by the time my 10 minutes are up, I would've tactfully informed him that he needs us more than we need him. We can fight, win, and defend without a single politician meddling in our business. America is our business, defending her is our goal, and business is good.
As a side note, I'd like to ask him/her to make a televised formal apology from the Nation to ALL of the Nam vets who came home to a country who didn't care for them, to a VA system just as broken as it is now, and politicians who thought the troops are the bottom feeders of America. Make it right, it's not too late.

Response by CPT Mike Seals made Feb 7 at 2016 8:42 AM

CPT Mike Seals — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 08:42:30 -0500

I have to agree. The VA desperately needs to be overhauled. As a 16-year vet who didn't retire, it may sound self-serving, but those of us who served deserve much better than the current state of affairs.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Feb 7 at 2016 11:09 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 11:09:06 -0500

Wouldn't that depend on the next president elected?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 7 at 2016 7:55 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:55:06 -0500

I would pressure for a change in mindset about gear vs. training. I'm very pleased to have top quality gear, but I'd rather be able to pay for better training with an M240b than have an M240l. Our new 10 tons are nice, but the old fives did the job. Pay for training.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Feb 8 at 2016 11:02 AM

SFC Stephen King — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 11:02:47 -0500

COL Mikel J. Burroughs Pay and entitlements. If you look at the minimum wage and it's recent increase it time to look at the few who choose to serve and have served.
SGLI

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Feb 9 at 2016 8:41 AM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 08:41:44 -0500

I would insist on presumptive exposure ruling on all AO claims. I would insist on 100% healthcare coverage for those rated 100% disabled who are residing OCONUS and have Federal law changed so that 100% disabled receive the same Space A travel afforded retirees.

Response by SPC Andrew Griffin made Feb 9 at 2016 12:37 PM

SPC Andrew Griffin — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:37:22 -0500

The raise and pay scale! More educational benefits! Increased Training!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2016 5:41 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 17:41:26 -0500

LTC Stephen F. - I would at-first go back to American Pride and another thing would be to reinstate the damage already done. From WWOD do to WWJD.

Response by SSG Richard Hackwith made Feb 9 at 2016 11:17 PM

SSG Richard Hackwith — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 23:17:27 -0500

I would ask to made Secretary of The Army and given a free hand to restore old fashioned leadership values, readiness, meaningful training and proficiency. Including the ability to get rid of toxic and inefficient personnel. And have the power to acquire equipment and resources without political restrictions likewise the ability to dump any useless junk without political interference. That's for starters, I could think of more later.

Response by LCpl Cody Collins made Feb 13 at 2016 7:27 PM

LCpl Cody Collins — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 19:27:40 -0500

I've been out of the service since August 1988.
So any changes that I could think of, have already taken place. I would ask POTUS to ban all Hollywood actors and actresses from setting foot on all military installations. 99.99% of them are commie sellouts anyway.

Response by GySgt Bryan A. McGown "Gunny" made Feb 14 at 2016 8:12 AM

GySgt Bryan A. McGown "Gunny" — Sun, 14 Feb 2016 08:12:45 -0500

I, for one, would immediately return eye care to retired service members, and their eligible dependents. My wife and I lost our TriCare Prime coverage in Ohio, yet a mere 2 hours away, very good friends I retired with, have accessibility to it and even another, more advanced health care system. Another oddity in healthcare is the fact that Chiropractic Drs must be licensed in their respective states, yet, many state and federal programs deny these practitioners equal access to insurance billing. So, that might be another area that I think I would personally request, as I know it has been a very effective treatment modality for my wife and I in the past.

Response by PO1 Kerry French made Feb 17 at 2016 12:38 AM

PO1 Kerry French — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:38:50 -0500

When President Cruz takes office, and since I have had a one on one with him, I know he will restore our military to it's greatness and take care of our vets.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2016 2:35 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Feb 2016 02:35:55 -0500

I'd retool the academies into graduate-level schools for active duty - since they serve no logical purpose as they are - stop trying to turn every piece of equipment into a multi-role Swiss Army knife, and make all physical standards uniform for both genders but based upon job requirements.

Response by PFC Stephen Eric Serati made Feb 18 at 2016 11:46 AM

PFC Stephen Eric Serati — Thu, 18 Feb 2016 11:46:13 -0500

I would try to get the new President to raise the pay to a livable wage for Enlisted.