|
By Bruce Kesler
 ENCINITAS, California—Hollywood cares more about its stars than the Defense Department about its own. One can go online and find every Academy Award winner on its database. Not only does the Defense Department not have a comprehensive or complete database of all those awarded medals of valor but the Defense Department is opposed to proposed legislation to create one. What’s wrong with an Honor Roll for those we have honored?
The title of B.G. Burkett’s book Stolen Valor became the title of a Congressional bill signed in 2006 that provided civil penalties for falsely claiming military medals. Congress officially found: “Fraudulent claims surrounding the receipt of the [medals]…damage the reputation and meaning of such decorations and medals…. Legislative action is necessary to permit law enforcement officers to protect the reputation and meaning of military decorations and medals.” It’s not just a matter of honor involved, however, as many frauds involve claims of government benefits or of status to advance careers or political positions.
Enforcement has been spotty, depending largely upon private individuals to investigate and then US Attorneys to decide whether to prosecute. In late 2007, The US Attorney in Washington state concluded a year-long investigation resulting in eight prosecutions of frauds that cost taxpayers $1.4-million. One of the defendants had been widely touted by anti-war groups, and accepted at face value by some in the major media, as being an elite Ranger who witnessed commission of atrocities upon Iraqis, and claimed veterans PTSD benefits, but had actually been discharged from the Army about a month after joining the Army. In 2008, there were more than 40 prosecutions in the US, which barely scratches the surface. Other well-documented cases of fraud were not prosecuted by US Attorneys.
The private citizen whose diligent work led to the Stolen Valor Act, Doug Sterner (website HomeOfHeroes.com), tells me that, “I can show you literally hundreds of slam-dunk/open-and-shut cases of individuals we have photos of wearing unearned awards who have never been touched. The FBI is swamped, and the problem is further generated by a lack of understanding.”
To appreciate the scope of fraud, a Chicago Tribune reporter found that a third of those in Who’s Who who claimed medals of valor had falsely declared themselves recipients of medals for bravery, including prominent lawyers, clergy, businessmen. The publication has now tightened its rules for citation.
The Associated Press found in April 2009 that although there are 21 surviving POWs from the 1991 Gulf War, the Department of Veterans Affairs is paying disability payments to “286 service members it says were taken prisoner during that conflict.” Similarly, with about 560 living POWs from Vietnam, “996 purported Vietnam POWs are getting disability payments, the VA told AP.”
The Department of Veterans Affairs has tightened its intake procedures, to directly receive from DOD separated vets’ DD-214, which should prevent such occurrences, but this is since about five years ago for those separated from service after that. Veterans Affairs official procedures do provide for verification. Nonetheless, intake or later verification may lag or not occur, or the claimant commit other frauds. The Department of Veterans Affairs, not wanting to delay or impede help to those who may need it, indeed, proposes that its psychiatrists accept claimants as suffering PTSD in absence of combat-related service, which formalizes what many have been doing anyway, according to the AP’s named insiders.
Interviews I conducted with a wide-range of involved liberal, conservative, and less partisan senior staff in Congress and Veterans Affairs, and examination of official documents, shows less a lack of understanding than a lack of priority to this issue.
Colorado Democrat Congressman John Salazar proposed HR 666 last January, as he had in the prior Congress, for the Defense Department to create a public database of all military valor awards. Of the 47 co-sponsors, only eight were Republicans, and among the Democrats was one of the most liberal members of Congress, San Diego’s Bob Filner, long-time leader in obtaining improved veterans benefits. The bill was forwarded to the House Armed Services Military Personnel Subcommittee chaired by fellow San Diego Democrat Susan Davis, who has not scheduled any hearings. Susan Davis did support the earlier Stolen Valor Act. None of the other San Diego congressmen, Republicans, have joined the co-sponsors of HR 666, although the Legislative aide to freshman Rep. Duncan Hunter told me that he expects Hunter to sign on.
No one has implied to me there is a partisan contention involved. The staff member of the Armed Services Committee who attended a recent constituent meeting on the legislation at HR 666 sponsor Congressman Salazar’s office told me “we’re not even looking at it now because of work on the Defense authorization bill.” That’s now. HR 666 and its predecessor have been around for two sessions of Congress.
A look at the hearings held this year by Susan Davis’ Subcommittee shows “Psychological Stress in the Military: What Steps are Leaders Taking?,” studied innumerable times already.
The most likely cause of current hesitation is the couched opposition from the Defense Department, and lack of energetic support from leading veterans organizations.
A seven page letter from the Defense Department to House Armed Services Committee Chairman, Ike Skelton, in April professes that for a public database to include the necessary specific information (such as Social Security number and date of birth) to avoid mistaken identities is contrary to the Privacy Act. The DOD, also, suggests that such a database be restricted to Silver Stars and up, as those are the only ones solely awarded for acts of valor, and only from 9/11/2001 forward as record keeping before that was inadequate. The cost to meet the DOD’s suggestions are estimated at $250,000, but larger to expand beyond that. The DOD concludes the database would, thus, be of limited utility to law enforcement but primarily a “repository of historical information.”
Doug Sterner replies that at a personal expense of about $25,000, “My current database is considered 99.% complete for the top three levels of awards (Medal of Honor, Distinguished Service Cross, Navy Cross, Air Force Cross, and the Distinguished Service Medals), and my index of Silver Stars is estimated at 75% complete for all wars and all branches of service. That personal database is used by the F.B.I., Congressional Research Services, the Texas Department of Transportation, Army Human Resources Command, and many others, including multiple media outlets,
Go to the top of next column
|
|
in much the same fashion as would be the expanded database called for in H.R. 666.” The records to be entered in the
database are already public record, and previously distributed to recipients, family and press.
The effort is not unprecedented, as during the 1920’s the (then) War Department compiled all US medals of valor from the Civil War through WWI, subsequently updated through 1942 for later granted awards for that period. For World War II to the present, a family member must labor or pay to access the National Archives, or file a Freedom Of Information Act request, response often taking a year or incomplete. Sterner replies to those saying have the vet supply his or her DD-214:
“Without a doubt, the DD 214 is the most commonly forged/altered military document presented in American society today. When confronted with a case involving one person with a fraudulently obtained ‘Legion of Valor’ license plate in Texas, the Texas DoT began investigating all 67 individuals in the state with such plates. To do this they turned to my own database of DSC, Navy Cross, and Air Force Cross recipients. All plates require individuals to produce documentation to vette their claim to the distinctive plates, but fourteen of the 67 individuals in Texas with ‘Legion of Valor’ plates were found to have obtained them fraudulently.”
Sterner addresses the Privacy Act hesitation: “Privacy laws do preclude including the SSN and DOB for any living recipient (such information does become releasable under FOIA when the individual is deceased). Using my own database containing the names of 120,000 recipients of the Silver Star or higher in history (all wars/all branches), the name cited in the DoD report 'John R. Smith' appears only twice…both of them for the same man who in World War II earned two Silver Stars.
“Furthermore, such information as Home Of Record (at the time of service) IS releasable under FOIA, and is often published in the General Orders and/or citations for awards. This information alone vastly reduces the argument that common names can be used for what is essentially ‘identity theft.’
“There is however, an even more compelling fact that refutes the assertion in the DoD report that such a database would lack needed 'identifiers'. Prior to 1968 the military services assigned a 'Service Number' to military personnel [phased out after 1968], a number unique to the individual, separate from their Social Security Number, and that Service Number is releasable under FOIA, and publishable with citations. This means that all awards presented for actions prior to 1968 can include the veteran's service number. Further, the Social Security Number of a veteran either Killed in Action or who is subsequently deceased, is publishable.”
For the top three levels of awards, only 320 of 24,048 could fall in the category of conflicting with the Privacy Act, due to death or other unique identifiers being publicly releasable. Similar proportions may apply to other levels of medals for valor. The DOD database could either redact such Privacy Act prohibited identifiers for these relative few, caveat such entries, only authorize certain law enforcement bodies, and/or steer inquirers to just present with evidence their concern about an individual’s claim of a valor medal for confidential investigation.
Some assert that some awards are not public due to secrecy of missions; some refute this. I haven't been able to establish the definitive truth. Surely, the Defense Department can, at least, avow whether a particular individual received a valor award even if details are withheld.
“Furthermore, such information as Home Of Record (at the time of service) is releasable under FOIA, and is often published in the General Orders and/or citations for awards. This information alone vastly reduces the argument that common names can be used for what is essentially ‘identity theft.’
Finally, Sterner raises an issue not addressed by the Defense Department: “Conspicuous by its absence from the DoD report is the other side of the database issue…Real heroes forgotten by the nation they served. I can personally recount numerous cases of highly decorated heroes slighted, nearly denied proper burial or recognitions on their headstones, because there is no comprehensive database of the men and women who have received military awards. This issue is Not about exposing Phony heroes, but about properly remembering real heroes.” San Diego Union-Tribune reporter Steve Liewer recounts one such incident, where the DOD failed to locate records and local congressman Darrel Issa then helped the daughter of a deceased hero locate them.
Now, one would expect the veterans organizations to be deeply concerned. Only the Military Order of the Purple Heart has officially supported the legislation in the previous Congress, its National Commander calling the current situation “pathetic” and recounting its experience with honored vets denied benefits due to DOD’s failure to provide accurate records. "With the state of the art electronics we have today, all records should be digitized and available for recall." The Veterans of Foreign Wars (although a supportive article appeared in its magazine), the American Legion, and the Jewish War Veterans have not come forth before Congress, nor have other vets organizations (except the National Adjutant of the Legion Of Honor, a retired Colonel who was awarded the Air Force Cross, who wrote me he supports the bill). Their individual and combined testimony before Susan Davis’ Subcommittee, February 25, 2009, on their priorities does not include a single word about “medals” or “awards,” they concentrating on obtaining or increasing benefits for veterans.
This pervasive lack of priority is compounded by sheer ignorance, even laziness, at the highest levels. ADCARS is a compilation of all General Orders in the Army during the Vietnam era, including medal awards, a prime source for DOD to compile a comprehensive listing. The Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Ike Skelton, in a letter dated December 23, 2008, says “my office contacted the U.S. Army about the program ADCARS [Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System for Vietnam era veterans]…According to the Army, there is no such thing as a program named ADCARS or anything that could be associated with such a program.” I find on the first page of a Google search a 5th Federal Circuit case citing ADCARS. “The ADCARS database has two aspects. First, each order in the system has been scanned into the database, creating a virtual image of the original document. Additionally, the database issued between 1965 and 1973, are still available to the public through the Army or the National Archives.” Another Google find: The US Army Board For Correction Of Military Records on June 11, 2009 also cites ADCARS for its finding in a case.
In September 2009, a man who falsely presented himself to investors as an Academy Award winner was convicted of investment scams. Frauds are not uncommon in many fields. At least the Academy has a public database those affected can check.
|
