that family had no choice, no chance to fight back, and no option to move to another location, no research -- no recourse. we are determined not to let this injustice stand. they sued the protesters. their case was heard by the supreme court. regrettably, the court ruled in favor of the protesters citing the first amendment. there should be no mistake, that decision does not mean that

preserving freedom of speech and the sanctity of the military funeral is mutually exclusive. on the contrary. it need not and should not come at the expense of families of buried soldiers. the supreme court only addressed the right to protest, leaving open the questions of where and when protest may take place at providing the genesis of our legislation by further defining time and place where funeral obstruction is not allowed. this act bills of a federal law enacted in 2006 that established buffer zones of 150 feet from the service and a 300 feet from the road to and from a military funeral. that law only covered funerals at federal cemeteries. that is why we provide a universe line -- uniform zone of

protection around civilians and locations where funerals are taken place. based on statutory provisions already lost, our bill increases quiet night before and after military funerals from 60 minutes to one of the 20 minutes, increases the buffer zone to 300 feet. then increase them from 300 feet to 500 feet the access routes to the funeral service where at least 20 states currently have this in place. this provides civil penalties as a deterrent and allows immediate family members to sue for monetary damages up to $50,000. we do not dictate the content of any state. a military funeral is a onetime events for the survivors. there are no do overs for

something so solemn and heartbreaking for grieving families. that is why this bill has been endorsed by 35 at veteran service organizations, including the military coalition, the vfw, the american legion. as was said, this is about the people to sacrifice their lives to serve this country. i will fight the fight and see what we can get accomplished. this is a battle that we will win. i hope this committee will view this bill favorably with york drew support to honor america's true american heroes. we owe a debt of gratitude -- gratitude we can never repay, but when we must never forget. >> thank you. it is great to have you here. senator warner. >> gracias, madam chairman.

i appreciate the opportunity to testify. i lend my support to the leadership on this piece of legislation. i have a piece of legislation i hope will be equally as by controversial. it was last june when many people first heard about some of the excesses and problems at arlington national cemetery. in all of us as americans were shocked to hear about the mismanagement and ineptitude that was taking place at the cemetery. on top of what had already been reported earlier this year, there were media reports that there had been a practice going on at arlington cemetery where the last two superintendents' had been, in effect, reserving grave sites for their friends.

army procedure since 1962 had been that when somebody had fallen, they would go to an appropriate procedure, and they get the next lot. unfortunately what was taking place was the superintendents were having a secret reservation list. a general may say he wanted a spot underneath a tree and, because there were no recording techniques, the spot would be reserved. astonishingly, the inspector general came up with a report in the early '90s that said this practice was ongoing, yet nothing was done about it. in late march i filed legislation in the senate to once and for all and the improper system of preserving great sites. the legislation passed three weeks ago overwhelmingly. obviously this is an issue that knows no party and has no cost

involved. the legislation we are discussing a will codify army regulations that ban reserving grave sites and provide transparency to the process with a full audit and report back to congress. it would direct the army to fully investigate and report back to congress within 180 days the number of lots that may have been set aside. the arlington manager must follow the rules. again, some general or friend of the superintendent should not be able to jump the line in front of any of our other service men and women. i think this past procedure has been offensive to not just veterans, but to any american. this legislation will correct it once and for all. i want to make one other comment. this circumstance at arlington, and i know this committee has looked at it, but it really is

an ongoing challenge. when we found the first reports that there were misplaced remains -- the record system was cards.5 we were once spilled cup of coffee from losing the records at arlington. the army said they were going to work on this. we took a separate approach. we actually contacted a lot of big companies in northern virginia. there are about 300,000 remains that were challenged. we think it is only about a record-keeping system. we got 20 companies to come together on a pro bono basis. they spent thousands of hours becoming bored with the report on what would be eight step-by- step audit in process to correct this problem the secretary received our report and said they would work with us.

it did not cost a dime. we did it all pro bono. we only got support about 120 days ago, which include short term and long term recommendations from cemeteries with a digitized records system, work flow charts to part improve business practices, and basic management techniques. i would like to say the army in those 120 days as a implemented those actions. to our knowledge, they have made small incremental improvements. this is still an area i know is a concern of the committee. this is a disgrace. not quite the story of zak, but let me close on one note -- i want to mention the work done by a virginia high-school student who is not graduating this year, but an 11th grader. his name is ricky. he is a computer student from stafford county, which is no. the origins were -- which is

north of fredericksburg. he did something arlington was not able to do. he went out with his own little computer and started to digitize where all of the remains for all of the iraq and afghanistan veterans were. the army spent $8 million on id contracts and have not been able to accomplish this. rikki, with his computer and access to public records, has created preserveandhonor.com. it catalogs with these iraq and afghanistan veterans are buried. if we can do this on his home computer, the army ought to be able to do with the millions of dollars of resources and appropriate management to get this job done correctly once and for all. we never want to read about these kind of stories. one small step we can take in that direction to make sure we finally ended this practice of

jumping on the line or having the superintendent reserve a great site for friend -- for a friend or ranking official, we in the commonwealth of virginia are proud that we have been the site of what is hallowed ground for our whole nation. my hope is that the community will act on this small piece of legislation. >> thank you very much, senator warner. i am sure every parent knows who we can turn these problems over to when it comes to technology. [laughter] senator white house. >> thank you. i appreciate your service to our veterans who work for this committee. i am very pleased to join senator snowe and senator warner. i have heard the legislation

they have put forward today to protect the integrity and dignity of military funerals and the integrity and dignity of the process to which gravesides or allocated at arlington. i am honored to be in their company to date. i very much appreciate your service. i am here to speak about legislation to improve protection for military families from losing their homes through long "-- a fruit wrongful foreclosure. while operations in afghanistan that around the world have put demands on our men and women in uniform, lenders at home have disregarded the laws to protect service members from losing their families -- losing their homes when they deploy. the department of justice announced a settlement with lenders who had violated the service members relief act and unlawfully and foreclosed on as many as 175 service members. thousands of military families

had been overcharged on their mortgages. all of us heard horror stories from our home states about how badly some panic to institutions have treated our homeowners in distress. these abusive mortgage practices hard the men and women we sent in harm's way to protect our country and it deserves our attention. not only are these practice is illegal and morally repugnant, they can also be a dangerous distraction from our military mission. service members overseas have enough to worry about without worrying about their families being mistreated of the home front. returning service members have also been hit particularly hard by the current economic downturn. in 2010, the unemployment rate for returning veterans averaged 11.5% compared to a 9.4% national rate. furthermore, according to a comprehensive report on veteran homelessness, veterans or 50%

more likely to become homeless than other americans. these statistics underscore the difficulty of readjustment to live at home for a returning service members who need time to get back on solid financial footing. we should do everything we can to accommodate their needs, especially during these difficult economic times. to better protect our men and women in uniform, i have introduced peake protected members mortgage act. it has been endorsed by several senators. this bill would double the maximum criminal "-- criminal and civil penalties for violation of current foreclosure and eviction protection. it would extend and make permit -- permit the mortgage protection coverage. under current law, service

members and nine months of foreclosure protection after military service. this provision is due to expire december 31, 2012. then service members will only get 90 days foreclosure protection. my bill would permanently extend the period of foreclosure protection beyond nine months. i hope senators on both sides of the aisle will support this legislation and i thank you again for the opportunity to speak on this important issue. i look forward to working with chairman mary and other members of this committee to pass this legislation, which i believe would discourage further violation and help protect the financial and emotional well- being of our military families. >> thank you very much, senator whitehouse. all of your provisions have strong merit. i hope to work with senator byrd to include them in the package that we will consider for markup on the 20 night of this month. thank you very much for your testimony. i do not have any questions.

thank you very much. we really appreciate it. we will now move to our first panel. please come up been set at the witness table. i will introduce you to join us. from the department of veterans affairs, we have the principal deputy and sick -- undersecretary for benefits, and the principal deputy undersecretary for health. they are accompanied today by assistant general counsel with us from the department of labour. as they are being seated, i notice senator byrd stepped out for a minute. i do want to address the issue that he mentioned in his opening statement. i understand from my staff to your testimony was late due in large part for the omb.

i want to emphasize for you and everyone that comes before this committee that we do require testimony to be received 48 hours before scheduled hearings because our members need time to adequately prepare for the hearing and make sure that the positions of your respective departments or properly presented for this committee. i will be calling up with omb directly and make sure they understand this is unacceptable. i join with my colleague senator byrd. we will be talking to omb. before i turn to our first panel, i notice senator glenn vall has joined us. i want to get him an opportunity to get his testimony before the committee. >> thank you very much.

i particularly want to thank you for your leadership in this area. i have introduced a bill called the "honoring all veterans act." and the "chiropractic care for all veterans act," which follows the leadership that you have requited and other colleagues in the senate that had started and carried forward this effort to keep pace with the men and women who serve and sacrifice for our freedom. the va has taken some strong steps towards building a 21st century support system, but gaps in the system remain. they are devastating for many of our veterans. we must do better and we must do more. the legislation i have produced provides a package of 16 provisions aimed at better health care, jobs, educational

opportunities, and streamlining and modernizing the va. i will submit for the record my full testimony. i very much appreciate you giving me this opportunity to talk to the panel today. i just want to say that my experience, as i know yours and other members of the panel is, we really need to have a comprehensive approach to deal with the signature wounds of the afghanistan and iraq conflicts, which are brain injury, posttraumatic stress, as well as other injuries that veterans up prior conflicts have suffered. that approach has to involve both the department of defense and the veterans administration, for example, providing effective diagnosis of these wounds. some 20% of them are undiagnosed, therefore, and

treated. we need to provide treatment, not just diagnosis. we need to make sure information is tracked and the care is transitions between those agencies. the legislation i have introduced would provide veterans leaving the va medical facilities to have a recovery plan for those kinds of injuries that would provide for qualified psychiatrists, psychologists, and nursing professionals to work at va medical hospitals and outpatient clinics and access graduates from the uniformed services univ. of the health sciences. for example, in connecticut and other institutions. veterans, like all americans, are striving to provide for

their families. this would address the issue such as the recently expanded post 911 gi bill. the legislation would raise the statutory cap for the rotational rehabilitation and independent living program to welcome hundreds of additional veterans. it would authorize veterans to reduce the transitional program and meet with counselors at any military installation for up to eight year after their separation. it also authorizes other measures, such as a study to ensure civilian employers and educational institutions recognize veterans training. we have an outreach program to provide for campus based outreach programs to veterans. we need, also, measures for veterans who lack jobs and like a home.

they need a roof over their head. the those kinds of facilities can be supported and funded through the measures of this panel is considering. i am realistic about the difficulty of approving and passing this kind of measure. i hope for bipartisan support. i think keeping faith with our veterans should command support from both sides of the aisle. i know that you have worked very hard as chairman of this panel to muster the kind of support and i thank you for it and thank you for giving me the opportunity to sponsor legislation to make chiropractic care available for all veterans, model of legislation even introduced in the past. it would provide for the kind of injuries that so many of the returning to iraq and

afghanistan better reince suffer from. they are one of the most frequent medical diagnoses of this -- of these conflicts. every devorin should have the immediate access to -- every veteran should have the immediate access to chiropractic care. that kind of care should be available to all veterans. the legislation would actually require the secretary of veterans affairs to provide a chiropractic care at a minimum of 75 va medical centers by 2012. and at va medical centers by december 31, 2013. again, i thank you for your leadership and others on the panel in supporting these kind of measures. i'd like working with you again. thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk today. >> thank you for your

comprehensive consideration of these issues. thank you for joining us today. quite good morning. thank you for inviting us today to prevent the administration's views. i apologize for the delay in delivering our testimony to the committee. joining me is the assistant general counsel. walt the full written statement has been submitted for the record. we would like to discuss these bills. discuss the administration's views on today's agenda. the va appreciate your efforts to improve employment opportunities for returning service members. we support your hiring heroes act of 2011. what it would provide rehabilitative services in the

system to severely disabled active-duty service members and expand va's authority to provide on-the-job training. all but va does not support all of the bill, we would be happy to discuss our concerns with the committee. we share the concerns about veterans employment and we're committed to working with congress to approve -- improved working opportunities for our nation's veterans. we support the intent of -- and favor of enacting the bill. 745 would protect certain veterans enrolled in educational assistance programs as they existed before the inaction of the public law.

we will continue working with the committee to ensure that legislative changes do not negatively and that education beneficiaries. the veterans compensation cost- of-living adjustment act of 2011 mandated a cost-of-living adjustment and compensation paint -- payable for periods on or after december 1, 2011. we believe our veterans and dependents deserve no less. the veterans pension protection act of 2011 would exclude service payments from determinations of annual income for purposes of determining eligibility for pensions. excluding income payments received for pain and suffering -- they do not get reimbursement for daily living. this would be inconsistent.

the agency does not propose provisions of the bill. the retroactive award of compensation for a veteran whose application was fully developed after the date submitted to the va. we do not support this bill because it would result in an equitable the treatment. -- and equitable treatment. we appreciate the attempt to create this attempt. military officials conducted with dignity and respect. we support this because it would establish a unified approach to preserve the dignity of funeral services and reinforce the commitment to the privacy of attendees at a time of bereavement. it provide protection for grieving families and services meant to honor the fallen see -- fallen heroes who paid the ultimate price. the veterans and prevent active

2011 carries many provisions proposed by the administration. all but we had not had the opportunity to review the bill closely, we offer our support of the general intent -- and yet of the bill. we built -- the general intent of the bill. this concludes my statement. >> thank you, madam chairman. i appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on some of the related bills wanted a's agenda i am accompanied by mr. walter hall, who is the general counsel. i apologize for the tardiness of our oral statements and

appreciate your indulgence. va supports the extension of eligibility for health care coverage for children until the age of 26. this would bring va's health care benefits for children in line with coverage available by the private sector under the affordable care act, which was enacted last year. this is an important program that will benefit all the 60,000 children of veterans. we appreciate the intent of f666, the dramatic brain injury and care act of 2011 which would require the secretary to provide a report. we appreciate the concerns about making these viable services available. i am pleased to report that we are expanding our service is by establishing enhanced support teams in four pierson, montana. we expect to have the staff in

place to be providing services by the end of the year. we have taken steps to address the concerns of the veterans equal treatment act of 2011 which prohibits the secretary from excluding service members from any va facility that receive funding. in march we published a state directive which directs that veterans and members of the public with disabilities to require the use of a serviced lot be able to enter the possibility. we will establish criteria for service dogs in all the eight facilities. -- in all va facilities. we also support the intent that would allow the va to provide travel benefits to veterans using the the centers for readjustment counseling. this issue has had our attention for some time.

we have run assessments to provide more insight to the possible impact of providing this benefit. the centers currently offered veterans, potential treatment. veterans will have to submit a claim for travel. veterans have responded very positively to the current model. any changes we make should not reduce the appeal of these benefits for veterans. because of this concern, we withhold action on this bill until we can provide the results of our assessment. the veterans dramatic geraint -- brain injury act of 2011 seeks to improve our programs by providing rehabilitative services. we generally have no objections to this. we have been developing individualized plans for all enrolled veterans for several years. our primary aim for veterans with serious or severe injuries

has always been and always will be to maximize the veterans and dependents, help, and quality of life. we have two concerns for this bill. the hague takes the camp lejeune matter very seriously. we will be able to provide juba for any condition that cannot be eliminated. this will be a broader authority for care. we have concerns about the adequacy of the scientific evidence available today, but ongoing research for toxic services -- services they provide a clear view on what kind of conditions are associated with this exposure. there are concerns such as be able to identify those who may have been at camp lejeune for a short period of time. we are committed to mutter and

research. this concludes my prepared statement madam chairman, i will be pleased to respond to whatever questions you have. >> i am please to appear today before the committee to discuss legislation pending in this committee and helping our transitioning service members am returning service members transition back into civilian life. i like to comment on two bills. the hiring heroes act of 2011 -- mandatory participation in the transition assistance program. we believe all transitioning service members who plan to enter civilian employment would benefit from attending the employment workshop, but deferred to the department of defense as to whether the program should be mandatory. we support the concept of fault contained in section 7, above --

but believe the metrics will make this requirement unnecessary. as part of the redesign, the comprehensive follow-up program will be amended to track success in entering the civilian workforce. we believe this program that provide the and vote the committee resource -- desires. we would like to work with the committee to provide additional information. dol believe that section 8 is unnecessary. we note that this section seems to closely follow the parameters of the veterans work force investment program. it is unclear whether this differs. therefore, we would like to work with the committee to discuss the potential overlap. we believe that section 9, concerning identifying equivalencies between military occupational specialties and civilian employment difficulties -- duplicates existing processes that provide

capabilities do put service members skills to civilian population -- civilian occupations. the department supports section 11, the requested time period be changed from one uttered by days until 15 weeks. we support the concept of section 13 and believes the credential and licensing of veterans is very helpful in transitioning service members to the civilian sector. we would like to work with the committee to resolve the issues. honoring all veterans act of 2011, we defer to the va and dod for a section of this bill.

we believe section 1 of 5 is unnecessary. the department created the program in 2008 to fulfill this need. we propose to work with the committee to determine if our committee needs further enhancements. i think the committee for your commitment to our nation's veterans and for the opportunity to testify today. we will be happy to work with your staff to provide assistance to any of these bills. i will be happy to respond to any questions. >> thank you very much. mr. mclean, let me begin the questions with you. i know says the administration proposed several provisions in the hiring heroes act, the goal is to make sure our men and women in uniform capitalize on their service. some people have invested a great deal of money in training for these men and women as they get to service and we want to make sure that we get a benefit from that and that they get a benefit from that. today we have an unemployment rate of 27% among our veterans

coming home from iraq and afghanistan. i think it is most telling to remind all of us that the army along, just the army, is paying out nearly $1 billion in unemployment benefits every year. that is $1 billion because these men and women are out of work. we continue to hear all the time from veterans who do not have the jobs support they need when they leave the service. doing nothing is not the right approach. i want to ask you today what you propose. >> madam chair, we believe the redesigned transition assistance program is a keystone to assisting people as they leave the service. our assistance secretary has testified before this committee of the parameters of that. we believe a restructured and re-engineering program has great strains that will allow transitioning service members to codify the skills they need and translate their military skills into civilian skills. one of the unique aspects of

that is the individual transition program plan for each individual participant will write out a plan to get them to their goals. we believe there are many tools currently available to assist people in identifying that translation between skills, but into the civilian workforce and into the federal work force and our program will strengthen the participants' ability to take advantage of this. >> i want to ask you more explicitly about that, but before i do, i want to turn to dr. jesse. recent work by the gao uncovered some disturbing information. it is unacceptable that our veterans, especially our most barbel of veterans, under the department's supervision cannot be kept safe. i am very concerned the va failed to inform leadership about these allegations.

i want to ask you today what is going on out there and what the va is doing to adjust the situation. >> va does take patient and employee safety barry serious. -- very serious. the secretary has possibly reminded us that we have responsibilities to accomplish the mission and take care of the people. much of the secretary's agenda has centered around the safety of those veterans. one of the first things he did was to stand up the office of the security and procurement under the assistant secretary, which includes operational lysing the integrated -- operationalizing the integrated

system. it provides the secretary frequent briefings on what is going on. we have taken these allegations very seriously. we investigate them very seriously. we are in the process of reviewing the gao's recommendations, particularly where they have identified critical errors where they point out we may have issues for improvement. we also have in march of 2010 issued a va directive, which is -- which assesses the responsibility of the emergency department for the appropriate management of veterans to have undergone sexual assault to ensure they get treatment, including treatment that meet all the standards. we think that was a very important component of bringing this in place.

we will take steps to expand our reporting of allegations. we have two processes. i think we need to reconcile them and make sure we have to dance and clarity from both of those directions. the bottom line is we do have the responsibility to protect our veterans and protect our employees. just as the veterans and protected us, we take that responsibility very seriously. i knew we had discussions next week to go over this in doubt. >> this committee will be following this very closely. this is very disturbing. it is hard to believe that senior leaders in these facilities did not know what was going on. the breakdown of communication is a serious issue. your adjusted for a second there, but just as these were happening and people did not feel safe enough to tell people about it or follow up on it or

report it is extremely disturbing. dr. jesse, we want to keep this conversation going. mr. met william, i want to return back to you. you talk about redesign of the program. that works very well with our legislation. i appreciate that, but we have been waiting a long time for a redesign. when you expect to revamp it? >> our deadline, or objective is to have this in place by this november -- veterans day. >> ok. in november of this year. >> yes ma'am. >> dod is opposed to mandatory tap. you say members would benefit from attending the workshop. had you explain the disconnect between the two agencies?

>> madame chair, i hate to speak on behalf of the department of defense, but i believe that is their issue. the mandatory issue, perhaps, gathers people who are retiring and not going into employment, just strictly retiring. i believed there concerns have to do with demobilizing the reserve. >> we will be calling up with them as well. senator? >> we have so much that really does not pertain to the bills we are here to talk about. we could spend a day with just the va alone. i want to acknowledge the fact that both of you apologize for not having your testimony here on time. i will note i did not hear any

-- either one of you say this would not happen again. we have rules and in the committee. i did not even hear you apologize, mr. mcwilliams. this may be a joke to some of you. i do not know. maybe it is the instructions not to have it here where committees can thoroughly go through and dissect what an agency says. on many of the bills, we do not have a views on. it is impossible for me to believe that pieces of legislation that had been introduced in some time you have no views on. you have no cost estimates on. it raises big questions when you take lightly committee rules about when testimony needs to be here. i guess i should not be bewildered, but we cannot hit deadlines that are statutory for claims processing, or for other things when there is no sense of the deadline being anything

other than a goal. the chairman raised an issue of was not going to raise, but i will chime in on it, and that is the gao report. let me assure you -- we was banned many hearings on this. -- we will hold many hearings on this. in 2010, 14 rapes, 44 inappropriate touches, 3 forced medical examinations, five enforced inappropriate oral sex. 2009 -- 23 rates, 66 inappropriate touches, 3 forced medical and seven nations, three forceful or inappropriate or sex, nine other. that is just since we set up an incentive. of the 67 rape allegations that were listed in 2007, 2008,

2009, and 2010, only 25 were sent to the office of the inspector general. of the 67 rape allegations, only 25 were referred to the office of the inspector general. there is a breakdown that is a tremendous. i cannot imagine any company in america not referring to their council or to outside counsel an allegation by an employee where a customer of sexual charges. but it seems like this is just another piece of business at the va. let me assure you, and i believe the chairman will raise this to the highest level, i have absolute confidence that we will explore this in great detail. let me turn to our va witnesses. i in your testimony on my bill, caring for get was june veterans, you indicated that the

number of veterans and their families sit by water contamination to be 1 million. the preliminary cost estimate provided to me by the cbo, they put the number at 650,000. cbo arrived at this number with information provided to them by the department of defense on the military personnel family members who lived at camp lejeune. can you describe the matrix that you used to identify 1 million affected veterans and family members? >> we do not have good numbers. we do not have the numbers we could use to estimate the cost. >> va has estimated the cost in the past. that is what drew me to the conclusion, i think, that they came to.

can you account for the discrepancy in the two numbers? that is 350,000 people. >> no sir, i cannot. >> mr. mcwilliams, the tap program is undergoing a redesign. the goal is to roll up the new program by veterans day. you say the new program will include a comprehensive follow- up plant to check the progress of veterans that took tap while in the military. can you detail for us the comprehensive follow-up plan? >> the plan is to put metrics on how well the program assisted the participant in entering civilian employment. we plan to do it at three moments of truth, the first being when the person completes the program while they are still in the military. the second what they are in these jobs search mode, looking for employment. the third one being shortly after they enter employment and

have become a member of a civilian organization. >> duties metrics follow -- check anything other than purchase but satisfaction? >> it is supposed to look at satisfaction and what portions of the program assisted them or what additional parts of the program they would need to have done better on their job search or have done the on boarding and become a new member of an organization. >> how long do you think it will take to collect enough data to end -- to gauge the effect is this -- effectiveness and outcome? >> i do not know if i could put a timeframe on that now. we plan to start doing this as soon as we start teaching the new cap. i am ascent during the next fiscal year that we will begin gathering the data. >> in the bill on the agenda at that would allow veterans that submitted claims to receive

benefits for one year before those claims are filed. last year, the va provided these views on a very similar piece of legislation, and i quote, "the availability of a retroactive affected date from the award a disability compensation granted on a plane fully developed when submitted would create an incentive for a veteran to supply fully developed claims. that would free up resources at va regional offices to address the claims that law." i'll be honest with you -- i am going to use the testimony as my own words as to what people should vote for this bill. i think the va has made the settlers claim as to why this bill should become law. let me ask you, what percentage of claims are now fully developed when submitted to the va? >> i appreciate your comments about the backlog. i want to reassure you that the

leadership at my job, we live and breathe the back lot every day. we have some technology issues. we are doing business processes. one of these things is a program that lets us incentivize along the lines that you talked about. your case comes complete to us, we will posset -- process it within 90 days. >> how may fully develop claims the you have? >> we have less than 1%. >> is it working like you thought it would? >> no, sir. as we put it into process, it's used, we realized one of the things that mike was an outrage to the veterans, making sure they are aware of this program. we realized we have an initiative and what we want to do -- we do not want to get

inundated with so many that we cannot focus, but we started with this initiative and we realized that we were not getting the return that we wanted. >> how much does the va spent on veterans outreach annually? >> i do not know. i know we'll put a priority on that because we realized be more information we can get out to veterans, the more communication, it enhances our trust and are caught in nets. one of our biggest challenges as we process claims is development, of gathering all that information. if we can partner with the veteran to do that, that will help us get better claims. >> understand my frustration. we are standing in and out -- all this, yet you do not know how much we currently spend again at reach. this is the reason we are 1% bonds under develop claims.

i know it because i had assessed that it is a failure. that is why i try to create a new program that has a real incentive that would say it is worth us to go out and work with veterans to develop plans. it's -- it is worth it for the veterans to understand it. what is the average time it takes to complete a fully developed claim purse is the time it takes 48 not fully develop claim? >> for the month of april, it was taking approximately 160 days to process a claim. a fully developed claim could be done in 100 days. we realized our goal was 90 days. what we are trying to do, going back to your point about outreach, is working with the veterans, but also working -- but also letting them know we have this capability and

encouraging them to use it. this is a great way you can collect your case and bring it to us. that is how much quicker we can adjudicated. >> i thank you for your optimism. it is just a personal observation. i have seen through two administrations and multiple people to fill your role come in and share with the chairman and i the great plan they have to reduce the backlog. annually, i have seen the backlog increase and increase and increase. every year we have been told about the new technology. i have sat down with the head of technology. i have tremendous confidence in him, but if it does not worked, where are we? is it not time that we focus on how we get claims in that reduced the amount of time because it reduces the amount of time an individual has to spend finding the information they need to make a decision on a

claim? i hate to bring my business background into this, but sometimes common-sense has to trump trying to look for some major breakthrough that is not being used. the good news for veterans is that we have damn near used every excuse as to why the disability claims process is not working. we are just about out of the suggestions. it may be that if technology does not work -- if we can all get on the same page and focus on what we do to drastically changed the outcome for our nation's veterans. i think the chair. she has been very patient with me. >> thank you, madame chair. thank you for your leadership and the ambitious agenda of this committee and the tremendous work you have all done. in '94 the cost-of-living adjustment at and the hiring

heroes act of 2011 -- the focus of the administration and a major component of our focus on job creation should be about veterans and what we can do in that direction. i think we have played a role. the veterans issues are more important than partisan politics. job creation among veterans is especially important as we spend so much money in this country on defense and so many veterans are out of work. something does not quite fit there. i hope the committee will consider s572, a bill to include -- improved collective bargaining for the eight doctors and nurses. i will ask dr. jesse a question about that. bargaining rights the been eroding overtime. the bill is not about bargaining over pay scale, but about giving

employees the right to challenge violations of the the a pay rules. be a professionals at the same rights as other va employees. doctors and nurses in other federal facilities -- they are accountable for complying with their own payrolls. my question, dr. jesse, about the reason for this bill -- the be a -- does the va collect data on how many medical professionals with the va over the lack of bargaining rights over unfair type practices? second, is there a good chance a physician who's promised incentive pay to come to the va

, when the va rates that promise, the employee does not have the recourse he or she might have? dr. jesse, if you weigh in on both of those. >> in response to the first question, i do not know the answer offhand. i will have to get back to you. the second answer, -- the answer to the second question, we have done very well over the past several years in its recruiting and maintaining work force banks to the congress for the bill they passed in 2006, i believe. it was an extraordinary effort that really changed our capability to get high-quality physicians to come to the va and stay there. i can speak to that from a personal sense.

i have been the chief of cardiology in richmond and that had to recruits very competitive positions in cardiology and physiology. we have been able to retain those positions. in terms of our people leaving because we renig on performance pay, my sense is, yes, they may, and it would be to our loss that they would frankly, these positions can get paid ttwo to three to four times more. they do not have their salary predicated on doing procedures -- i want to be careful about my

words -- we can do appropriate procedures. we can do the right things for patients because we have a model of physician reimbursement that supports doing the right thing for the patient. that work construct, the pay construct has been very beneficial. we do use retention bonuses to keep the more challenging physicians, which i would include radiology, cardiology, some other surgical specialties. i do not know that we have suffered significant losses because we renig on them. >> are