Well, a defense contractor (and I believe anyone associated with the federal government) has a contracting officer representative (COR) overseeing their efforts. The contract stipulates the content and frequency of progress reports, cost statistics and personnel tracking. All these items go to the COR for review and approval. There is a great deal of oversight. I have been retired for seven plus years now and I had a mix of military officers and civilians overseeing our work. I never heard anyone say or allow us unrestricted anything. We are excluded from certain discussions and meeting. Yet, we do hold a position of trust with the agency we support. If someone runs afoul of the law, it is probably due to their own misconception on the limits of their authority and involvement. I adjusted to this somewhat stiffling environment by reflecting on the sage advice of a friend who told me, " hang your ego up next to your uniform when you retire." It is very difficulty to swallow some of the swamp water from time to time, but I have a mortgage to pay.
DJ

My dad was a hospital commander for years. I can tell you he was a military man. His uniform had the CIB on it from his time as an infatryman at Okinawa. He would tell you it's the attitude of the younger non-miitary minded doctors. They came in because they used the Army to pay for their eduation and were looking to get out when they paid their time requirement.

There is nothing really wrong at Walter Reed except attitude and forgetting the mission statement. "Best care anywhere". The troops are priority one and that seems to be forgotten in this world of politically correct used pieces of toilet paper folks running the show. Too much postering to little doing. Then comes not enough qualified medical personnel to go around. Doctors today expect to make well over $100k after 4 or 5 years past internship..I don't think junior majors pay comes even close. After 10 or so years they should be in the vicinity of $250-300...LTC's still haven't cracked the $100k level nor full bullsfor that matter, so we need more incentives to keep good medical people in. Free housing and food allowances are great, but it takes a special kind of man to be a doctor first and a politican second for the money they make versus what they could make on the outside. And in todays society, you are what kind of money you make

Steve-- I cannot argue with you over that one. Money talks. A person spends a great deal of time, effort and money to become a doctor. They should not expect to be paid anything less than what the market will reimburse them. For those who advocate universal health care, I would ask them to recall WRAMCs problems. Multiply that by the population of the US and you can see why it will not work. Nice political theme that we have heard every year since 1996. Unfortunately, the government' intervention only drives up the cost of health care. I just completed a four day stay in the hospital. The place was run like a hotel. I could not imagine getting this same treatment through the VA or the military. I pay a hefty sum for the insurance and if this is what I get for the payments, I am satisfied. Now, the poor guy/gal laying in the rack in a military hospital is also getting the best health care in the world. You want for nothing except human compassion and understanding. Nurses who act like drill sergeants and doctors who cannot remember your name just reinforce a common perception that the military does not care for people. I know that is wrong, but the perception persists. By the way, we are pouring money into WRAMC while at the same time we are closing it down. Reminds me of that algebra problem which goes something like, if you pump water through a four inch pipe into a container with a two inch drain , how much water will the container hold? Duh! I was never very good at math. I do not think someone is doing the math on this one either.
DJ

Gotta chime in on this thread:

* I was a teenager sacking grocerys at Krogers during the Cuban Missle fiasco, and most of the men were under 24 years old. We even had a couple guys that worked there part time while still on active duty in the Army. When JFK made his famous speech it scared these guys to death, and of course it frightened the hell outta me. Castro was egging the Russians to fire the missles at us, but the Russians weren't that stupid! I think JFK pretty much laid it out on the table, but with the treaty that evolved outta this we suffered greatly for the next forty years. We lost the B47 and the B58 bombers, and we later found out just how scared the Russians were of them. Victory: Russians!

* I was employed by LBJ for awhile back in the day. Never hated him, but most all of joked about him regularly. He just inherited a mess from JFK, and then listened to the CIA and McNamara ( McNamara was what was wrong with that war). So what was wrong?
1. The CIA was completely out of control, and completely isolated from
the DIA and a couple other very black organizations.
2. The government we were supporting was extremely corrupt and
played both sides of the street. By 1966 it was a "no win situation."
3. McNamara was more interested in politics and covering up for the
Democratic Party, than in waging a war. Everything with him was
done in a "politically correct fashion." Even if it was dead wrong. His
other great mistake was the constantly second guessing of his
General Staff. A good point here was the 1968 TET offensive! Don't
think the situation room in the White House didn't know what was
about to happen! They knew right down to when and where the
attacks would occure. But the troops on the line were not alluded to
that piece of data. I can remember quite well setting in a meeting
with Gen. Koster giving a speech about what was about to happen
in Feb. 1968. He even spoke of armor, and fresh divisions from the
north. Westmoreland even went so far as to predict it, and the siege
of Khe San. It's a matter of public record that he informed the White
House personally! So who do we blame? McNamara, LBJ, Grant
Sharp for starters. Sharp was relieved soon after the start of Tet (he
should have been in jail). Suggest you all read the book "Valley Of
Decision." The author is impeccable, and one of the few to tell the
truth.
Now with George Bush on the hot seat, time will only tell. He hasn't done a bad job over there when you consider that he also was waging war with Europe at the same time. The Democrate Party has been back dooring him to point that it borders treason. A large group of his own party are guilty too. And then to add insult to injury we have my own "most hated President" violating the Logan Act almost weekly! There's not way for him to win. Lastly he's also doing exactly what LBJ did in the sixties. Managing a war from the basement of the White House!
gary

I usually keep to myself, but this is one of those times I have to put my 2 cents in.

I read in the newspapers how bad Walter Reed is. I hear from various people who wish me to think they have my best intrests in mind saying how bad Walter Reed is. But...

A dear family friend was wounded by a VIEB while serving with the 172nd, and spent most of last year in and out of Walter Reed. When I asked him what he thought of the place, he had nothing but good to say about the Hospital and its Staff.

Now who do I believe? The newspapers (who when you do a bit of research on your own, you find they tend to make up whatever "facts" they need to push whatever their agenda is). Guys and gals I have never met that happen to have access to a microphone. Or a guy I know personally who actually spent a bit of time there.

Hmmm..

Gary, I agree with the 3 points you make. LBJ not only listened to bad advice ,he let government agencies operate their own little fiefdoms whether through ignorance or collusion. He greatly expanded the war over and above the advisors JFK would have probably pulled out. In any case he was responsible. The buck stops here. A few people made money off of Viet Nam & the same thing is happening in Iraq. I don't want to witness American helicopters fleeing our embassy loaded with refugees again. I've heard it said that all democracies end in Imperialism. I think both Viet Nam and Iraq were an Emporers war. We were not attacked and barely threatened , at the time and in hindsight.

I think one of the best ways to fix the system is to populate the various boards with wounded veterans who are actually on disability for wounds received in combat. Doctors and other medical personnel should only serve as advisors to the boards, unless they ehemselves have been wounded in action.

The VA system should care for the wounded first, then those severely injured on active duty while performing their duties (not drunk driving, etc.). Those who can't make it on the outside after they leave the service should stand in line with the rest of the population for civilian care. Being a veteran doesn't give us first claim on the national treasure - it only gives us the right to live in a free land.

I lost a lot of my hearing in Vietnam as an artilleryman. I am eligible for VA care for my hearing loss, but I haven't applied because I personally think the VA resources should be devoted to those who were wounded in action.

Semper Fi,
Dave