THE LAWSUIT: GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
The VVA and VMW offer the following comments on the Government's response.
In its response, the VA does not contest that it takes many, many months, and often years, to reach decisions that have critical consequences for our nation's disabled veterans. Instead, it launches a barrage of legal arguments, many already rejected by numerous courts, about why the VA should not be held accountable. The VA's claims about the adverse consequences of a court order that forces it to do its job ring particularly hollow, given the agency's repeated admissions that it has all the resources it needs -- Congress gave the VA a larger budget than it asked for during the past few years -- to do its job.
The Government's arguments, all aimed at evading rather than embracing its legal responsibilities, are quite extraordinary.
It claims:
Veterans cannot establish undue delay.Our Reaction:
Apparently, to the Government, veterans who wait a year or more for initial claims decisions, and four years for decisions on appeal -- many of whom receive no equitable relief in the form of monetary payments -- do not suffer from "undue delay." One wonders what kind of delay qualifies as "undue."It claims:
Veterans cannot sue under federal law because there has been "no final agency action."Our Reaction:
The VA is using its own delays as a means to avoid accountability. The law, however, makes it very clear that an agency cannot evade its legal responsibility by simply failing to act. The Government's argument seems to be that as long as the VA simply fails to reach a decision on a veteran's request for benefits decisions, there has been no "final action" that would entitle a veteran to seek any legal recourse. Delays, in essence, can never be remedied.It claims:
The VVA and VMW overstate the harm to their members.Our Reaction:
The delays -- anywhere from one to more than four years for disability benefits claims to be adjudicated -- are creating devastating financial and emotional harms to our disabled veterans. The insensitivity of the very agency assigned to help these veterans, who have already sacrificed greatly for their country, is astounding.It claims:
Disabled veterans are not in as bad shape as the lawsuit claims because many of them will receive five years of free medical care.Our Reaction:
Medical care does not pay the mortgage of a veteran who cannot work. It does not buy formula for a baby or school clothes for a child whose parent cannot work. It does not buy gasoline or pay for utilities. And it certainly does not treat the demoralizing effect on veterans are essentially being told that they have to suffer these hardships because the VA is unwilling or unable to do its job.It claims:
The Government would be harmed if it were forced to reorder agency assets to meet the requested timeframes.Our Reaction:
The VA has admitted that it has the resources it needs to carry out its mission. It is up to the VA to decide how, or even whether, assets should be allocated to ensure the prompt adjudication of disability benefits applications.It claims:
Perhaps most remarkably, the Government argues that the public interest supports the denial, rather than grant, of the injunction that the plaintiffs seek. It claims that Congress, after careful balancing, has determined that the VA's (broken) system is simply the one with which disabled veterans must live, and that it should not be held accountable for its failures.Our Reaction:
We cannot believe that any member of Congress would stand up and say that that it is not in the public interest for the VA to promptly adjudicate the disability claims of those men and women who have already sacrificed so much for their country.
The time has come for the VA to stop making excuses, and start taking responsibility for the incredible failures of a system that is supposed to be supporting our disabled veterans at a time when those veterans most need it.
Information for the Media
Veteran Profiles
Seven veterans tell their stories
