Righteous Smackdown by a US Congresswoman (and disabled Veteran)

[Sabrina]

If this has been posted before, please merge with the other thread thanks.

Some background here; Tammy Duckworth is the first double amputee to ever be elected to the US House of Representatives, and the first disabled woman. She lost her right leg near the hip and her left leg below the knee due to taking RPG fire in Iraq while flying her helicopter, and is currently in danger of losing her right arm as well because of the significant damage to it as a result of that same incident.

As to the video, I'm not certain of the background of why this guy is testifying before a congressional committee in the first place, although I believe it may have something to do with the fact that he's been using his disabled veteran status (30%) to get preferred treatment for government contracts for his company. The kicker here; he never actually served in the military. He twisted his ankle (possibly broke it; I'm not sure) while playing football in a military prep school. Apparently this now qualifies you for VA disability; playing football.

People like this, the ones who game the system for their own benefit, quite literally make me sick. While I cannot begin to claim injuries on the level of Ms. Duckworth's, I am a disabled veteran. I badly misaligned about nine of my vertebrae while carrying a very heavy load during my one and only deployment in 2003 and developed degenerative disc disease as well as at least one small tear on a disc in my lower back as a result of that poor decision. I was granted 10% disability in 2006. My condition has grown steadily worse over the years since then, and I am now in the situation where I am undergoing a medical evaluation board in order to determine my fitness for duty, since like Ms. Duckworth, I have continued to serve in the military. This might increase my disability to around 20%, perhaps, but the most likely outcome is that I will be unable to continue to serve despite actually WANTING to do so, and so I will be medically retired. Twelve years of service (sixteen if you count my ROTC time, which, since I was under contract and the Army was paying me, they do), and now I'm unable to give any more. It hurts the most because I would actually deploy again if I were physically capable of meeting the standards the Army has for their deploying personnel, but I can't meet them, so I'm going to content myself with deploying as a civilian before too much longer; at least I'll be able to provide a service that way.

I sympathize with this guy if this injury truly has caused him that much pain over the years, but this, what he's doing, I find utterly reprehensible. It's because of jerks like this that so many veterans don't even bother filing claims any more; everything has to be so closely scrutinized and double-checked that they just decide it's not worth it. I truly hope that the VA yanks his disability rating entirely and forces him to pay back every penny of money he's fraudulently collected since he was awarded that claim; he deserves no less.

 

[newyorkguy]

Yeah that's pretty bad.

 

[12AX7]

God I love Tammy Duckworth!

 

[BStrong]

I saw it on Friday at work, and my general agita went into overdrive.

I know what my Father and Uncle would have had to say to that little prick, and Duckworth did a fine day's work in putting him on the spot.

I don't wish that man any ill will at all, I just hope a truck runs over his *********** head.

 

[jiggeryqua]

So, there are rules, and because she's further inside them than he is, he deserves a truck to run over his [expletive deleted] head? "I'm more disabled than you, and ok, you haven't broken the rules, but just because the law says what you did is ok, you're not as disabled as you could be, you're not a war hero, you're a cheater, for following the rules but not being a poster boy".

If he'd been more substantially disabled, unequivocally had his life destroyed, while playing football at a prep school that qualified under the rules for being military duty, would she still snipe about people she knew (or the person she is) who are more disabled? If the rules are wrong, change the rules, don't traduce the player.

 

[fuelair]

Hate the game, kill the players. (first thing I thought of the first time I heard someone say "don't hate the player, hate the game")

 

[12AX7]

So, there are rules, and because she's further inside them than he is, he deserves a truck to run over his [expletive deleted] head? "I'm more disabled than you, and ok, you haven't broken the rules, but just because the law says what you did is ok, you're not as disabled as you could be, you're not a war hero, you're a cheater, for following the rules but not being a poster boy".

If he'd been more substantially disabled, unequivocally had his life destroyed, while playing football at a prep school that qualified under the rules for being military duty, would she still snipe about people she knew (or the person she is) who are more disabled? If the rules are wrong, change the rules, don't traduce the player.

Twisting your ankle while playing football at a military prep school is not the same as being injured in defense of this nation.

He's gaming the system, yeah. People game the system every day, it's a fact of life. The part that probably really pissed her off (and me as well) was his description of that "injury" as kind of heroic/patriotic/combat-related incident.

Full disclosure: I'm a vet.

 

[Sabrina]

So, there are rules, and because she's further inside them than he is, he deserves a truck to run over his [expletive deleted] head? "I'm more disabled than you, and ok, you haven't broken the rules, but just because the law says what you did is ok, you're not as disabled as you could be, you're not a war hero, you're a cheater, for following the rules but not being a poster boy".

If he'd been more substantially disabled, unequivocally had his life destroyed, while playing football at a prep school that qualified under the rules for being military duty, would she still snipe about people she knew (or the person she is) who are more disabled? If the rules are wrong, change the rules, don't traduce the player.

jiggeryqua, you seem to have missed the point.

This man never actually served a day on active duty. Not one. He twisted, perhaps broke, his ankle while playing football at a military prep school. I'm skeptical that this even qualifies him for VA coverage at all, but I'll freely admit I'm not certain how military prep schools fit into the overall military structure. Are they being paid for attending this school? Which school was it that he attended? West Point pays its students a small stipend for attending and the cadets there are considered to be part of the military, but do other prep schools do the same?

And then there's the misrepresentation already in evidence from the man's own letter, which Ms. Duckworth read from in the video, wherein he calls his injury "a sacrifice to service of this great nation" and says he would do it again in service of this great nation. As Ms. Duckworth said so eloquently, I am so happy that he'd be willing to play football again in prep school in service of the nation.

It's fairly evident that the man is willing to misrepresent his injury in order to gain monetary advantage in his job just from that one letter she read, so what's to prevent him from also misrepresenting that injury in order to gain a monetary advantage from a struggling government program that barely has the manpower and resources to deal with the veterans who are TRULY in need of their services?

THAT is why I dislike people like this. I know of so many true veterans, people who have willingly risked their lives in defense of the USA, who have simply not bothered to file VA claims because they think there's no advantage to it, and it's largely because of people like this who think that they should take advantage of a struggling system. I am, of course, not privy to the exact wording of his claim to the VA, but the evidence suggests that he's perfectly willing to exaggerate his injury in order to gain the disability if that letter is any indication, and so I find his motives extremely suspect. If you can't see the problem with that, well then I'm sorry, but his actions are those of a man who is selfish and calculating, and shows that he does not understand in the slightest what true service really is.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

So, there are rules, and because she's further inside them than he is, he deserves a truck to run over his [expletive deleted] head? "I'm more disabled than you, and ok, you haven't broken the rules, but just because the law says what you did is ok, you're not as disabled as you could be, you're not a war hero, you're a cheater, for following the rules but not being a poster boy".

If he'd been more substantially disabled, unequivocally had his life destroyed, while playing football at a prep school that qualified under the rules for being military duty, would she still snipe about people she knew (or the person she is) who are more disabled? If the rules are wrong, change the rules, don't traduce the player.

I agree. If there's anything scandalous going on, it's that Congress (the ones who make the rules) allows this to happen.

FWIW, those who keep pointing out that the guy wasn't injured in combat seem to think that VA disability is only intended for people injured in combat.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

It's fairly evident that the man is willing to misrepresent his injury

I didn't see that evidence. If he committed fraud, then take away his benefits and penalize him for the crime of fraud. But I don't think there's any evidence at all that that happened.

The closest thing to that is that he probably cast his VA disability in a positive light in the letter to the Small Business Administration. But that happens all the time. Someone injured in a non-combat situation while deployed is considered to have been defending our country. People injured during training are also said to have been injured defending our country. (On a tangent someone injured in Iraq like Ms. Duckworth is said to have been injured while defending our country, even though Iraq wasn't a credible threat to our country.) It's a commonly used euphemism, just like referring to any combat veteran as a "hero" no matter whether they did anything heroic.

I know of so many true veterans

No true Scotsman fallacy. By the rules, he qualifies as a "veteran" for purposes of getting VA disability.

And I don't think that's at issue anyway.

Despite Rep. Duckworth's scolding, I don't think she will be introducing legislation to bar students at U.S. military academies (and academy prep schools) from qualifying for VA benefits.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

This man never actually served a day on active duty.

That's false. While someone is attending a military academy prep school, he or she is considered to be an enlistee on active duty.

Civilians accepting an appointment to attend the United States Military Academy Preparatory School will join the Army as an Invitational Reservist and be placed on active duty on the day they report to the Prep School.

http://www.usma.edu/usmaps/SitePages/FAQs.aspx

 

[marplots]

(much snipped)

Some background here; Tammy Duckworth is the first double amputee to ever be elected to the US House of Representatives, and the first disabled woman. She lost her right leg near the hip and her left leg below the knee due to taking RPG fire in Iraq while flying her helicopter, and is currently in danger of losing her right arm as well because of the significant damage to it as a result of that same incident.

So at 1:20, when she describes her feet hurting, she's lying, since she doesn't have feet? Seems like an odd thing to lie about to make a point.

 

[Cleon]

So at 1:20, when she describes her feet hurting, she's lying, since she doesn't have feet? Seems like an odd thing to lie about to make a point.

No, she's not lying. It's called the phantom limb, and it's very common with amputees.

 

[newyorkguy]

As a US Army veteran who served in a combat zone I too am outraged by this man's actions. How bad was his injury that, after prep school, he went on to play college football? In his application he wrote some garbage about not being able to play with his kids because of his 'service-connected injury.'

Why then did he wait twenty-eight years to file his claim?

Castillo, who applied for his disability in 2012 shortly after buying [Strong Castle -- an information technology company based in Leesburg, Va], told Duckworth he believed he deserves his VA disability.

He is using the "service-connected" disability to gain priority in bidding on government contracts.

The guy is being accused of gaming the system. The VA system is not adequately funded, especially with the surge of severely injured Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. Part of the reason is because, just as Congresswoman Duckworth said, so many people are faking or exaggerating claims to get money.

Luckily for our country, there are still many decent and honorable people out there who do not try and take advantage of the system. Like me for instance.

I received a permanent injury while on active military duty and it was a line-of-duty injury. I was treated by Army doctors and I continue to receive occasional treatment from the VA. Technically I probably qualify for disability, but since the injury does not hinder me at all, I have never tried to claim disability. Nor will I. My sense of decency and fair play inhibit me. There are hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of veterans just like me.

Then you have people like Mr. Castillo.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

As a US Army veteran who served in a combat zone I too am outraged by this man's actions. How bad was his injury that, after prep school, he went on to play college football? In his application he wrote some garbage about not being able to play with his kids because of his 'service-connected injury.'

Why then did he wait twenty-eight years to file his claim?

And I hope Rep. Duckworth also subpoenas the person in the VA who approved Castille's application and asks why these questions weren't part of the application.

And I hope that exchange gets as much attention as the feels-good-but-accomplishes-nothing "smackdown".

 

[Sabrina]

That's false. While someone is attending a military academy prep school, he or she is considered to be an enlistee on active duty.



http://www.usma.edu/usmaps/SitePages/FAQs.aspx

That's only West Point. Which one did this man attend, and do the same rules apply to that prep school as well?

You'll note, Joe, that I already conceded that persons who attend West Point are considered to be active members of the military; HOWEVER, that is only West Point. There are numerous other prep schools (Fork Union comes to mind) that may not have the same standards applied to them. To the best of my knowledge, West Point is the only military prep school where the students are considered active members of the military. Given that it's stated Mr. Castillo went on to play college football, my guess is that the prep school he attended was a high-school level school at best, and last I checked, high school students, even if they're in JROTC or similar programs, are not considered members of the active military (they're too young, for starters). I would be interested to know, however, if that assumption is correct; I've tried Google for the answer but can only find information about how West Point members are considered members of the military; nothing on any of the other numerous military prep schools out there. Perhaps my Google-fu is weak; I don't know, but I'd be very surprised to learn that any other prep school has it's members considered to be members of the active military.

Edit: Upon further Googling, I did find the Naval, Coast Guard, Merchant Marine, and Air Force academies as well. Those, along with West Point, are the only military academies whose members are considered to be active duty members of the military. Can anyone determine if Mr. Castillo attended any of these schools?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

That's only West Point. Which one did this man attend, and do the same rules apply to that prep school as well?

Already answered. Your claim that that's only West Point [ETA: or only West Point and the other Academies but not the prep schools] is false.

Read the FAQ bit that I quoted.

Here it is again with bolding for the words you somehow overlooked:

Civilians accepting an appointment to attend the United States Military Academy Preparatory School will join the Army as an Invitational Reservist and be placed on active duty on the day they report to the Prep School.

ETA:

Edit: Upon further Googling, I did find the Naval, Coast Guard, Merchant Marine, and Air Force academies as well. Those, along with West Point, are the only military academies whose members are considered to be active duty members of the military. Can anyone determine if Mr. Castillo attended any of these schools?

You did further Googling but still failed to read the quote or the link I spoonfed you that answers the question wrt the exact institution that Castillo attended?

ETA: I think I see what's going on. First, you're using "West Point" to refer to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and to the U.S. Military Academy Preparatory School. Fair enough. Second, you seem to doubt that this is the prep school Castillo attended, even though that's just what all the news stories I've seen specify. Third, do you suppose that while the Army prep school counts as active duty, the others do not?

 

[newyorkguy]

And I hope Rep. Duckworth also subpoenas the person in the VA who approved Castille's application and asks why these questions weren't part of the application.

And I hope that exchange gets as much attention as the feels-good-but-accomplishes-nothing "smackdown".

You seem somewhat hostile to this for reasons I don't quite understand. I think to call this man a "military veteran with a service-connected disability" is a gross insult to all the uniformed members on active duty who put themselves in harm's way and many, like Ms. Duckworth, paid a huge price for it. I find it a bit disconcerting that anyone would find her outrage hard to understand.

I also find it very troubling that someone would slander her by labeling her a liar. Someone who is apparently unaware that amputees often suffer from nerve-related 'phantom pain,' and instead presumed the most logical explanation was that Rep. Duckworth is a liar.

I also find it hard to understand anyone characterizing this Congressional hearing as a pointless "feels-good-but-accomplishes-nothing smackdown."

It's anything but. Marshaling public opinion is a major element in getting changes in the political process. That's a prime reason why Congress holds these hearings. To get matters before the public in a manner that resonates and grabs the public's attention.

This thread is pretty good evidence the hearing was effective.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You seem somewhat hostile to this for reasons I don't quite understand.

Hostile to what? I agree the guy is a sleaze, but he's not doing what Sabrina says. Sabrina claims the guy was never on active duty--not even one day.

I think to call this man a "military veteran with a service-connected disability" is a gross insult to all the uniformed members on active duty who put themselves in harm's way and many, like Ms. Duckworth, paid a huge price for it.

Why is it insulting? Is it insulting to the people who made the ultimate sacrifice and lost their lives that people who *only* lost a limb are making lots of political hay out of their service-related disability?

I find it a bit disconcerting that anyone would find her outrage hard to understand.

I understand it. It's more political theater. Her outrage may well be sincere, but it's still pointless, unless of course she follows up by proposing an amendment to the laws that would define attendance at military prep schools as being other than "active duty" or define injuries not sustained in the line of duty as not being service-related or whatever.

But she's not doing any such a thing, is she?

I also find it very troubling that someone would slander her by labeling her a liar. Someone who is apparently unaware that amputees often suffer from nerve-related 'phantom pain,' and instead presumed the most logical explanation was that Rep. Duckworth is a liar.

That wasn't me. But I presume that response was an attempt to point out the difference between saying something that is technically untrue while being true, or vice versa.

I also find it hard to understand anyone characterizing this Congressional hearing as a pointless "feels-good-but-accomplishes-nothing smackdown."

It's anything but. Marshaling public opinion is a major element in getting changes in the political process.

What change will be accomplished?

That's a prime reason why Congress holds these hearings. To get matters before the public in a manner that resonates and grabs the public's attention.

This thread is pretty good evidence the hearing was effective.

Effective at accomplishing what?

[ETA: I hope you're not saying that the best way to come up with new policy is by emotional response! Marshaling public opinion to support a proposal is one thing. Trying to generate outrage and the idea that something--anything--must be done is a bad way to make policy.]

Is Duckworth or anyone else even asking for support of legislation they've proposed that would solve this problem?

At the most, it's Duckworth putting her figurative toe in the water to see how things stand. At most, she'll gauge public reaction to this hearing before attempting to draft some proposed legislation.

IMO, the more important thing to do is consider what legislation would possibly solve this problem, and then ask if it's something we want. Do we want to deny active duty status to pre-cadets at military prep schools? Do we want to deny disability for injuries sustained other than in combat? Do we want to tighten up what degree of injury (or at least what medical evidence is needed) to qualify as "disabled"?

 

[newyorkguy]

How does the political process work? Why do people demonstrate, why do groups bother to mobilize large groups of people to assemble in Washington? "Groups" don't write legislation. Bills aren't introduced at rallies. So why do people bother?

I'm not going to debate this point, it's a waste of time. In fact I wouldn't have bothered to respond at all except for the following comments which I find absolutely shameful:

...
...that people who *only* lost a limb are making lots of political hay out of their service-related disability?

At the most, it's Duckworth putting her figurative toe in the water to see how things stand.

Those are horribly insensitive comments to make. Some of the worst I've ever seen.