." followed by the committee's markup of committee legislation. .ater, q&a >> on this memorial day weekend, we want to chairman the chairman of the senate veterans affairs committee, bernie sanders, independent, vermont. thank you, sir, for joining us. >> my pleasure. >> two reporters with us to help ask questions. steve vogel of "the washington post," national reporter, and politico defense reporter. >> one of the things we've heard over the last few weeks is that the veterans affairs department has missed a number of internal deadlines when it comes to cutting down backlogs of hundreds of thousands of plans. can you give us a view of what the problem looks like and what you're hearing? >> here's 30,000 view. number one, it's property to understand is that for whatever reason, and i don't want to cast aspersions, the v.a. was maybe one of the very few

major institutions in american society that did not go from paper to digital. they didn't do that. until shinseki became secretary. so the first question that we have to ask, how come? why? social security did it years ago, every major corporation obviously made the transition. so shinseki comes into office, and what ends up happening is there is a huge influx of new claims. now, what many people don't understand is that, yes, the back log is unacceptably long. we are all embarrassed that veterans in this country, in some cases, are waiting years to get the benefit. unacceptable, end of discussion. on the other hand, what many people don't know is that two things. number one, the v.a. has finally done what should have been done years ago, and i think they deserve credit for saying, look, we're going to

move to paper, and shinseki announced a very ambitious goal. i'm a politician, and let me tell you something, politicians don't get up there and say, you know what, at a certain point, i'm going to accomplish this. what shinseki said is at the end of 2015, all claims are going to be processed within 125 days with 98% accuracy. so he didn't beat around the bush. he was out there. now, is he going to do that? my job, among many others, is to make sure he does do that. second point that i would make that many people don't know, we can beat up on the v.a., fair enough, and we should. but we should also know is, guess what, they're processing far more claims now than they've ever processed before. what's happening is more and more claims are coming in, and not just from the young people,

but from iraq and afghanistan, but from veterans from vietnam already have benefits and want to upgrade the benefits. >> sir, that raises the question, if these goals are unrealistic or is the execution flawed? >> i didn't -- you didn't hear me say they're unrealistic. >> no, that's my question for you. given the fact that all these new claims are coming in, and they've set goals, is it unrealistic for them to set the goals? >> all i can tell you is i sat down with general shinseki, are you going to do it? he gave me a short answer, and the answer is yes, he is. and they are in the process now of undertaking, again, something that should have been done years ago. i have no idea why the v.a. was last guy on the block to move in this direction. but they're going from an incredibly, incredible amount of paper into the digital world. as i understand it now, some 40 out of the 56 regional centers are now moving in that direction. new claims are coming in and are now being processed in a digital way.

now, we are going to introduce legislation. the secretary said he wants to do this. they keep saying they're going to do it. our job is to make sure they do do it. what we don't want to do is find out in november of 2015 v.a. walks in and says, hmm, guess what, we were unable to do, it it's going to take us another five years. so we are monitoring them very closely. we have legislation which is going to have them, on a quarterly basis saying, look, this is where we projected we would be, this is where we are. so there will not be any surprises. and if they are not moving as fast as they should be, we will find out why, and we will provide the resources to make them achieve that goal. the only point that i want to make is the back log is unacceptable. shinseki deserves credit for make doing what should have been done years ago and for proclaiming a very ambitious goal. our job is to make sure he gets there. >> senator, the v.a. has been under so much pressure in recent months on this issue, a series of media reports, hearings on capitol hill, and they've been trotting out these initiatives almost on a weekly basis in recent weeks. mandatory overtime, putting veterans who've been waiting over a year basically at the head of the line, what do you make of these initiatives? are they serious, or do you think that they're just a dog

and pony show trying to act like they're doing something? >> again, what most politicians will do, if you say we have a problem, you say, well, we're going to work on this problem and i'm going to do my best. shinseki announced we will know whether he succeeds or not, and that's -- in my mind, it's a pretty brave thing to do. so if he doesn't make, it you'll be there. "washington post" will be there criticizing him, as i will. i think what they are trying to do now is to respond to some of the pressure. and let me say this. people who are putting pressure on the v.a. are absolutely right. what we have now is inexcusable. on the other hand, what should also be known and doesn't get quite as much media attention is that many of the major veterans organizations, disabled american vets, american legion, veterans of foreign wars, they came into the hearing --

we held our first hearing when i became chairman on this issue. we see it as a hugely important issue. you know what the organizations said? they said, first of all, we are getting more access to the v.a. and to the leadership than we ever had before, able to give input, and we think they are moving in the right direction. it is not going to happen overnight. so i think a little bit overshadowed in this discussion are the organizations representing many, many millions of veterans who do, in fact, believe that the v.a. is on the right track. so my job, again, is to make sure that these very ambitious goals are achieved and to work with the secretary to make sure that they happen. >> you heard some of the organizations say they're less satisfied with shinseki's performance and some have even called for him and the undersecretary to be resigned or retired. what do you say? >> i disagree. i think these again, this is not coming from the v.f.w.

and not from the disabled american veterans. and these are the guys who work with hundreds of thousands of veterans for processing claims. you have what they are trying to do now should have been done 10 years ago, should have been on done 20 years ago, ok? so i think general shinseki is working extremely hard. i respect general shinseki very much. i think you have serious people undertaking a very difficult job, and you can take potshots at them all of the time. will they succeed? i don't know. but my job is to do everything i can to make sure that they do succeed, and according to the v.a. today, they are on track to accomplish what they have decided -- their goal. >> just for our viewers, if they don't know who general hickey is, she is in charge of this v.a. backlog, correct? >> she is in charge of the agency dealing with the back log, correct. >> you said before, though, senator, it's ok for those in

congress and others to be putting pressure on the v.a. over this issue. do you see then that if, say, general hickey were to resign or step down, that that might help put more pressure on them? could you see that side of it? >> well, you know, that's one way of looking at it, but the other way of looking at it, it could slow down the entire process, ok? again, i don't want to beat a dead hog, dead whatever you're supposed to be, dead horse here, is the real question is, you raised it, why didn't they do this 10 years ago? why didn't they do this 20 years ago? so a guy comes in and says i'm going to do this. the v.a. also said, appropriately, to soldiers, to service members who served in vietnam, you know what they said? by the way, you're going to be eligible for a whole host of other benefits because of exposure to agent orange. that's exactly the right thing to do.

hundreds of thousands of claims came in there. sometimes, you can, you can fire you, fire you, fire everybody, and maybe you bring in people who will improve the situation. maybe not. maybe you slow down the progress that you, in fact, have been making. what i'm looking at it, i'm not suggesting they're moving perfectly, but they have undertaken, they've at least accepted the responsibility of moving from paper to a paperless system. they have welcomed new benefits that vietnam vets, among others, should be entitled to, bringing in more claims. they are processing more claims now than they have ever done before. our job is to monitor and provide oversight, mack sure they do what they said they were going to do. >> what do you make of the split between the veterans groups and some of these issues? the iraq and afghanistan vet vans have called for a presidential commission to look into the backlog, and other groups say it would be a waste of time. are they competing over the resources? >> i wouldn't say they're competing over the resources. you know, the younger veterans are impatient. i'm not here to criticize them. but the older veterans who have been around for a long time, who

have fought for years, by the way, just moved to a paperless system, are saying, in their view, i think it was said that we think the v.a. is moving in the right direction. so when you have a massive undertaking, yeah, we have to put as much pressure as we can on the v.a. to do the right thing, that i happen to think, as i said, that shinseki is a serious person. general allison hickey is serious, working hard, and we're seeing many progress. our job is to make sure they achieve their goals. >> what about a presidential commission? >> you can have a presidential commission. the president hasn't been very strong. he has provided good funding for the v.a. he has been right upfront about the need to address this issue. it's want like the president is sleeping. so i think sometimes you have commissions, and we bring these people in for 18 more hearings, what are you doing? and in the real world, that slows down the progress that you're making.

>> how much responsibility do you think the pentagon has for this? you saw house members suggest they've been woefully inefficient in providing records. >> i think it's delinquent. i think that's an excellent question. and i think that we have got to look at the d.o.d. a lot more closely than we have looked. what, at the end of the day, i think everybody says, what do you want? what you want is a system, a paperless system, when somebody goes in to the armed forces from day one until that person leaves this planet, we have access to their medical records. there should not be two separate worlds. in fact, the d.o.d. has, in my view, not done as much as they should to help us in that direction. right now, as you know, there's a major, major discussion about medical health records and need to create one system. when leon panetta was secretary of defense, working with secretary shinseki, that was it. they said it's one system. and now there's some discussion about interoperable systems, two separate systems that could so- called talk to each other. i have some concerns about that. my own -- what my understanding is, this system, which is currently -- currently the

health technology system used by the v.a., it's a very, very effective system by quality and cost effective. the question is, why is the d.o.d. not working within that system? and we will see what happens. >> do you agree with the house members when they say that president obama should intervene personally on this issue and force d.o.d. to cooperate more? >> yes, i think we need -- i've been working with carl levin, chairman of the armed forces committee. we met on this issue. barbara mikulski was chairman of the appropriations committee. we had a meeting the other day, before she brought the secretary of defense hagel and secretary shinseki together asking for further cooperation. there's no question, no one disputes this, that historically these guys in the v.a. and d.o.d.

have looked at each other as not as contesting agencies rather than cooperating agencies. we need far more cooperation. >> why is that? can you explain that? >> i think it's the culture of, you know, the d.o.d. has its mission, which is to fight wars, and the v.a. has its mission, which is for take care of the people who return from wars or veterans. and they've looked at each mission in a different way. what we understand is you're dealing with one human being. you were in vietnam. you were in iraq. you were in afghanistan. you served this country. we're proud of what you've done. now you're home. we're going to do our best to support you. you are one human being. and the systems have to work together in a much stronger way than they have in the past. >> we think some effort in that direction, you're seeing the d.o.d. and the v.a. talking far more than they have in the past, but we have got to do better. let me jump in and say just a couple of other things, which we sometimes forget.

the v.a. is running. doesn't get a whole lot of publicity, but they're running the largest integrated healthcare system in the united states of america with the 6.5 million people in there. and while i want to see improvement, and there are problems within the system, sometimes we're going to take a step back and acknowledge they're doing a pretty good job in a fairly dysfunctional healthcare climate in the united states of america on millions of people don't have any health insurance, when we spend far more on person on healthcare than people of other nation, you talk to veterans who are going to the v.a. they say, you know what, they're getting pretty good care, and they're being aggressive in terms of dealing with diabetes, weight loss, smoking, ptsd, huge issues, huge issues. we are learning in recent years what the cost of war is about. i didn't think -- i don't think we fully appreciated it. nobody comes home from combat the same person who went over there, and it's not just the tragedies we see in walter reed, the family owe who is lost their legs or their arms and their eyesight, it is people who are

coming home with ptsd or traumatic brain injury, tens and tens and tens of thousands of people, so we've got to work on some new efforts to figure out ways that we treat those people as effectively as we can. >> does the v.a. need to do more outreach to reach some of these veterans? >> that's a very good point. we have held three hearings, the first one dealt with the backlog. the second one dealt with healthcare in general. and the third one dealt with outreach. because i think the v.a. healthcare system is a strong system, but it doesn't mean anything to you if you don't know how to enroll in the system. and i think historically the v.a. bureaucracy has not done a good job in outreach, telling you, ok, you served, this is what you are entitled to. this is your system. you're a taxpayer. you're a veteran. we want you in the system. not everybody, in fact, will want to come to the v.a. healthcare system, but i suspect there are a lot of folks who don't even know what they're entitled to.

for example, we have 900 -- v.a. has 900 community-based outreach plants all over the country, and this is important stuff. we deal very poorly with primary healthcare. what the v.a. decided many decades ago, correctly, is that you have to bring primary healthcare to the veterans. one of these clinics, we have hundred of vet centers, where they primarily run by veterans themselves, people are veterans. they could play a good role in suicide prevention, and a variety of other psychological problems that veterans have. >> we have a little bit less than 10 minutes. you've seen recently the pentagon and the defense department, the defense department had been having this big fight over military sexual assault, and there was a report out this week that more than 85,000 veterans actually sought assistance from the v.a. with regards to claims related to sex crimes that they encountered or faced during the military. what do you think needs to be done there, and do you think the claims process is streamlined enough?

i think there's legislation with how much of a burden of proof needs to be. >> i'm sympathetic to that. we have a new relate at in life, and that is that women are playing a more and more significant role in the defense of our country. that has to be addressed. and we also, no great secret here, we have seen abuse after abuse. this is unacceptable. it's an embarrassment for our country. we have got to do within the d.o.d. everything that we can to hold those people responsible for abusing women. we're not laying down the line that that is not acceptable behavior, and we have seen that. and then within the veterans administration, we have got to make sure that, a, the claims are processed in a very timely manner, and second of all, provide the treatment to those women and men as well, you understand sexual abuse is not just a women's issue. there are men who are being

sexually abused. we have got to do a more aggressive job. i was in california a couple of months ago, and they have a very strong system, i think. they're doing a good job. do they need more resources? they probably do. the bottom line, if a woman serves her country and gets abused, we have got to do everything we can to protect her. >> senator, the v.a. has been exempt from the automatic budget cuts of sequester, but it seems veterans, veteran programs run by other federal agencies are being affected. is that a concern for you? is there anything you can do to get funding for some of these programs? >> it is a concern, steve, with we are working on that. i'll tell where you it comes in. the v.a. itself has been exempt from sequestration appropriately, so programs in h.u.d., in the

department of labor have not been. one of the areas that we are working on and are concerned about, that a lot of the young men and women coming back from iraq and afghanistan are not finding jobs. and the unemployment rate for the young veterans is too high. and we're working on a number of proposals to try to get them into the labor market, but we can't do that unless we have the support of the department of labor who helped us with those programs, and they as well. >> speaking with the cases you laid out here today, how much faith should veterans have in the department to provide their needs after coming back from war? >> let me say this. i think if you ask the knowledgeable observer what, what that person will say is the v.a. has come a long, long way in the last many years. let's be clear. after vietnam, we treated veterans in a very, very shameful way. and one of the disgraces in this country is a number of homeless veterans that we have, by the way, many of them from the vietnam era. and we're making some progress. v.a. has made some pretty good progress in addressing that. so i will say that if you look at the v.a. over the years, what most people would tell you is v.a. now is doing a pretty good job in terms of healthcare. they're making some progress on

the issue of homelessness. the backlog remains the immediate crisis that we face. there is a major effort going on to transform the entire v.a. system away from paper into paperless. the results will be known. ain't no secret. we're going to know pretty soon whether they succeed or not. they are making that effort. so i think in terms of outreach, the issue that steve raised, i don't think they do a particularly good job. i think we have to be much more aggressive to tell veterans the items they're entitled to. brain injury, ptsd, very difficult issues, i think they are -- these are tough issues. they have not been followed by any means. i think they're making a serious effort. so i would say that, you know, there's been a lot of just criticism about the backlog.

but i think if you look at the v.a. overall, if you're a veteran in the v.a. healthcare system, are you getting pretty good healthcare? yeah, you are. that's a big deal in america today. if you're in a nursing home, by and large, are there problems? there are. are some of the nursing homes working pretty well? they are. are the primary care facilities working pretty well? in general, they get high marks. i don't mean to say there aren't problems. but when you're treating 6.5 million people, trust me, you're going to have problems. the answer is, i would urge those veterans out there to take a look at the system, enroll. you don't like what you see, you don't have to participate. and one of the other issues that we're looking at is eligibility levels. as you know, that's been a problem. clinton opened up the ranks. anybody could come in. a lot of people did come in, became expensive, they closed it down. and a number of them are veterans. that causes confusion about eligibility, but that's an issue we want to take a look at as well. >> senator, as the iraq and

afghanistan wars wind down, is there a danger that congress' support for veterans, particularly given the budget pressures it's under, is going to wane as public attention moves away? >> that's a great question, and i think there is that danger. and this is what i want to say on this one, and i'm somebody, by the way, who voted against most wars. i'm not a great fan of wars. and i voted against the war in iraq. when i was younger, i opposed the war in vietnam. what we have to understand is you cannot ask anything more of a human being than when that person hits his or her life on the line to defend this country. and when people serve in combat, they come back as changed people. and if you're going to serve -- you know, i'm not terribly patient with folks who vote for war, give great speeches at the parades, but when we send people off to war, forget about the guys who serve in war when they come home. especially 30 years later. so, what we have to understand is that any time you vote for war, it's not just for the planes and the bullets and the tanks, it is to make sure that you're going to provide for that veteran if he or she is wounded in whatever way for the rest of

his or her life. back your obligation. if you want to vote for wars, send people to the military, that's your responsibility. i'll do my best to make sure we don't forget that lesson, and it's something to remember as we celebrate memorial day. >> how often do you get out to walter reed medical center? >> i've been out there several times. >> and describe what it's like when you go out there. >> it's painful. you know, you're impressed by the courage of these young people. they come home without any legs. just stop for a minute, you know? you have these healthy young guys, their whole lives in front of them. and suddenly at the age of 25,

they don't have any legs. and the v.a. does a very good job. we're leading the world in prosthetics, and we see these amazing things that people can do. but you're 25 years old. you don't have any legs. what does that mean? and these guys have shown just incredible resilience and courage, and we have to not only emotionally show them the respect that they deserve, but make sure that they get the benefits that they're entitled, which leads me to another issue, where i am in opposition to the president and many republicans and many democrats, the so- called c.p.i., which would cut social security benefits as well as benefits to disabled veterans. we do have a deficit problem,

but when one out of four corporations in this country doesn't pay a nickel in taxes, you do not balance the budget on the backs of those men and women who have given all and come back without any arms and legs. it would not only cut social security, it would cut benefits of disabled veterans. i'm doing everything i can to mack sure that does not take place. >> senator, given -- i wonder if you could give a report card overall for the job that secretary shinseki has done and whether you think there's anything to the call for his resignation. >> no, i strongly oppose the call for his resignation. i think u -- if i would make a criticism of the v.a. in general, and general shinseki, they do a very bad job with the media. that's all. they have got to be more out there. they have got to be talking about what's positive. they've got to talk about their problems. but what i hear from the media is they just don't do that very often. so that would be a criticism.

but i think in having met with general shinseki on a number of occasions, you have a serious guy now. he's a serious man. he's a pretty humble guy. he's not out there holding press conferences every day, telling you all the things he's doing. but he takes very seriously his responsibility to make sure that we do everything we can for the veterans of this country. the staff that he has brought on board, including allison hickey, tommy sauers, the now outreach director, scott gould, who was formerly his deputy, they're pretty impressive people. so, you know, he has a tough job in front of him. i appreciate what he's doing. >> senator bernie sanders, chairman of the senate veteran affairs committee, thank you very much for being part of our news makers program. >> thanks for having me. >> we're back with our reporters. so this backlog of veterans benefits is over 800,000. what has the secretary said he's going to do about this? what did you hear from the chairman of the veteran affairs committee in the senate about the progress that they're making? >> well, it's been interesting. general shinseki has made this very public, very outright goal that by 2015, there will be a certain number of days, 125 days or less in which these claims are being dealt with. and what's interesting about that, what you heard from senator sanders, he seems to take him at his word, that that's his intention. but if you look into the public, there are a lot of people who say we've seen this backlog continue to grow, and we've

heard this all before. so they're a little bit less skeptical. this is an achievable goal, and it's one that the secretary can actually accomplish, giving a lot of the challenges facing his department. >> steve vogel, who are the critics of the secretary of veterans affairs, and what are they saying? >> well, among the most prominent are the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america. they felt that the secretary hasn't been forceful enough, out there enough in terms of fighting this backlog. i think they're trying to draw attention to the problem. it seems there's a good amount of support on capitol hill, and certainly within the administration for secretary shinseki. allison hickey has been a bit of a lightning rod, although most of the veteran groups say that she has brought more energy to this backlog than any of her predecessors did. so i think there's going to be continuing pressure on the white house and the v.a. i thought it was interesting that senator sanders seemed to

support the letter from some of the house members urging him to get more personally involved in the whole debacle over electronic health records. >> getting the president more personally involved? >> exactly, exactly. senator sanders said he would like to see that, and the letter yesterday from 20 veteran affairs members, including chairman miller, asking him to get more involved, because you have these two large bureaucracies that haven't been able to find their way out of a longstanding problem. and after spending, you know, a billion dollars on this, they don't seem to be a whole lot closer to resolution than they were before. >> spent almost a billion dollars on their computer system and they're not talking to each

other? >> well, they're talking to each other, but the effort to create a single, seamless electronic health record is challenging when you have two bureaucracies that have developed their own system over many years. and, you know, some of it's technical. but some of it's turf. and trying to figure out a way around that is really flummoxed secretary panetta and now secretary hagel. >> wanda, what's next for vet issues? >> what you're likely to see over the next weeks and months on capitol hill is a continued push on this. this seems to be an issue you saw leader pelosi speak on this issue earlier this week. there's a lot of voice for this, and also the issue that senator sanders discussed on military sexual assault, and those claims as well are going to be a big force, particularly as you have the house and senate looking at their defense bills, which will

be targeting that particular issue, as well as separate legislation, moving in both chimers will to look at how claims for sex abuse are done within the department of veterans affairs as well. >> steve vogel, what are your thoughts on what -- what will you be watching for in the weeks ahead? >> it will be interesting to see how this back log, the amount of attention on it has been almost unprecedented in recent weeks and months. and it's almost as if every week the v.a. tries to come up with a new demonstration of how committed it is, but before long, the dates are going to come due for whether these goals and deadlines are being met, and so we're going to have some measurable data where we'll be able to gauge just how effective some of these steps the v.a. has been taking, whether they're working or not. >> steve vogel, wanda summers, thank you both. appreciate your time. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] on the next "washington jo