Veterans for Common Sense

March 15, 2008 – Nearly five years since the start of the Iraq war, the Bush administration is still funding much of it through emergency appropriations, and only partially through the regular defense budget. This is one of several ways in which the administration has managed to hide the true cost of the war from the American people. Until Congress insists on a full and open accounting, the nation won’t know how much of a drag it is on the economy.

more stories like thisEconomists once believed that wars stimulated an economy. But when much of the funding goes to Iraqi or Filipino contractors working in Iraq, the benefit to the US economy diminishes, especially in light of what the funding could achieve if used for home-front needs.

In the run-up to the war, President Bush’s top economic adviser, Larry Lindsey, said it might cost as much as $200 billion. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the actual amount would be just $50 billion to $60 billion, calling Lindsey’s projection “baloney,” much as Rumsfeld had belittled General Eric Shinseki’s estimate that it would take several hundred thousand US troops to fight the war successfully.

Both Lindsey and Rumsfeld were far from the mark. Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University’s Linda Bilmes have just published “The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict,” and they consider that figure a conservative estimate.

In their estimate, Stiglitz and Bilmes include the long-term costs for care of the wounded and the financing costs of paying for the war with borrowed money. Calculating the cost for veterans’ care was not easy. While the government discloses figures on those wounded by hostile action, Stiglitz and Bilmes had to use Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to learn the total injured in Iraq.

The two authors make much of what the country could be getting if it were not paying for the war. For a fraction of the war’s cost, Stiglitz has noted, Congress could put the Social Security system “on solid financial footing.” The entire federal budget for autism research, about $108 million, is spent every four hours in Iraq. With just $1 trillion, the country could provide 43 million students with scholarships for four years at public universities.

Wasted dollars are just one of the costs of the war, and not the most important. Nearly 4,000 US troops and at least tens of thousands of Iraqis have lost their lives. The conflict has left Iraq divided along its religious and ethnic fault lines, strengthened the theocracy in Iran, and made Uncle Sam a pariah in much of the Islamic world. This toll in human life and geopolitical consequences is all too obvious. Congress should make sure the country understands the economic cost of the war, too.

March 16, 2008 – When congressional Democrats called a hearing last month to explore the costs of the Iraq war, their star witness was not some number-crunching Pentagon planner or a besieged administration budget official. It was Joseph E. Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning Columbia University economist who is giving the White House heartburn with his forceful argument that the true price of the Iraq conflict will far surpass even the hundreds of billions of dollars already tallied.

The hearing came just days before the publication of The Three Trillion Dollar War, co-authored by Stiglitz and Harvard University lecturer and public finance expert Linda J. Bilmes. The book looks beyond the “emergency supplemental” budget requests and other official expenses and strives to estimate the full range of Iraq-related costs — including long-term care for veterans — that the nation will face for years to come.

The time is ripe for such an inquiry. The five-year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq finds the United States on the verge of recession, and the political debate is shifting toward whether the country should continue bankrolling such a war in the face of competing priorities.

Despite their sometimes technical prose, Stiglitz and Bilmes methodically build a compelling case that the costs of the war far exceed the $500 billion or so officially spent on it thus far. Yet by making many assumptions about the future course of the conflict — from its duration (through at least 2017, they predict) to its impact on global oil prices ($5 to $10 extra per barrel, for seven to eight years) — the authors will leave many readers unconvinced. Will the war prove extraordinarily expensive? Absolutely. But will the price tag be $2 trillion? $3 trillion? $5 trillion? It’s impossible to know.

Nevertheless, the authors address the economic realities of the conflict far more fully than did the administration before the March 2003 invasion. Then-deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz told Congress that Iraqi oil revenues would fully finance any postwar reconstruction, while Bush economic adviser Larry Lindsey lost his job for having the temerity to suggest that the conflict could cost $200 billion — a fraction of the funds appropriated to date. “The tone of the entire administration was cavalier,” Stiglitz and Bilmes write, “as if the sums involved were minimal.”

In the book’s most impassioned passages, the authors analyze the cost of veterans’ care. They explain that the ratio of injuries to deaths among troops in Iraq is greater than in any past U.S. war, a development they hail as a “tribute to advances in battlefield medicine.” With so many more injured troops surviving, however, veterans’ disabilities and medical treatment have become “two of the most significant long-term costs of the Iraq war.” Even the supposedly cheap Gulf War of 1991, they note, is still costing more than $4 billion annually in veterans’ benefits.

The authors then grapple with assigning a monetary value to the lives of troops killed at war, settling on $7.2 million per individual based on the Environmental Protection Agency’s cost estimate when someone dies in an environmental disaster. And, finally, the authors consider macroeconomic effects, assessing the impact of higher federal deficits and skyrocketing oil prices (which have gone from $25 to more than $100 per barrel since the war began) and estimating the foregone boon to the economy if even a portion of the funds spent on Iraq had gone toward schools, research, infrastructure or health care in the United States.

Stiglitz and Bilmes’s final tally reaches $2.2 trillion in their “best case” scenario and $5 trillion in their “realistic-moderate” scenario — and those figures don’t even count the costs to Iraq, U.S. allies and the rest of the world. Choosing to err on the conservative side (and perhaps on the side of a catchier book title), the authors settle on $3 trillion.

In their original 2006 academic paper on this topic, Stiglitz and Bilmes estimated the war’s price tag at $1 trillion to $2 trillion. Now they’re at $3 trillion, and Stiglitz seems comfortable going higher; he recently told Bloomberg News that the true cost is “much more like $5 trillion.”

A trillion here, a trillion there — pretty soon the line between “estimate” and “guess” gets a bit blurry. On occasion, Stiglitz and Bilmes appear to overreach. They often count the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan together, and they find ways to link all manner of bad things to the U.S. invasion. For example, because solutions to global problems such as AIDS, climate change and poverty require U.S. leadership, and because the Iraq war has diminished Washington’s moral standing in the world, the war is worsening AIDS, climate change and world poverty. Really?

Stiglitz has been a bit of a hero to the left for his widely read critiques of globalization, and The Three Trillion Dollar War promises to garner much attention as well. Excerpts have appeared in U.S. and international publications, and the book is set to be translated into Dutch, French, German, Italian, Japanese and Spanish.

To no one’s surprise, the White House already has dismissed its conclusions. “People like Joe Stiglitz lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure,” White House spokesman Tony Fratto recently told reporters. “What price does Joe Stiglitz put on attacks on the homeland that have already been prevented? Or doesn’t his slide rule work that way?”

Stiglitz and Bilmes should be commended — not disparaged — for their painstaking work. But war critics should weigh the numbers carefully. “We’re grateful to him,” Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) gushed over Stiglitz at the congressional hearing. “His book title speaks for itself.”

Except it doesn’t. The book’s title suggests a level of precision that is not borne out in its pages. The book’s stronger lesson is the sheer range of costs — and foregone opportunities — that the authors ably identify.

“In one way or another, we will be paying for these costs, today, next year, and over the coming decades — in higher taxes, in public and private investments that will have to be curtailed, in social programs that will have to be cut back,” they write. “One cannot fight a war, especially a war as long and as costly as this war, without paying the price.” *

March 14, 2008 – Washington, DC — One-third of women in the military and 6 percent of men said they were sexually harassed, according to the latest Pentagon survey on the issue.

The figure for women was worse than the previous finding several years ago but better than a similar survey taken in 1995, the Defense Department said in a report Friday.

A separate report on sexual assaults showed that fewer cases were reported among military personnel — 2,688 cases reported last year by people in uniform compared with 2,947 reported the year before. But officials said they haven’t been collecting the data long enough to determine whether a downward trend in assaults was developing.

Both reports are mandated by Congress. The finding on sexual harassment was from the Defense Manpower Data Center, which is to report every four years and in for the latest report surveyed more than 23,000 people in 2006. The one on sexual assaults is taken from reports of actual incidents reported in 2007.

Officials said that overall, the survey showed both men and women polled think the climate on sexual relations is better in the military than it is in the nation as a whole. And the survey found that a majority of those surveyed believe the military’s training on sexual harassment is effective.

Among the findings:

–In 2006, 34 percent of women surveyed said they had been sexually harassed.

Rachel Lipari, senior scientist with the data center, said that included a wide range of problems from crude and offensive behavior — ”your basic locker room talk” — to unwanted sexual attention, ”which is being repeatedly asked for dates even though you said no or ask to enter into a sexual relationship even though you said no, and then your classic sexual coercion, your classic quid pro quo.”

The 34 percent figure for women who reported harassment compared with 24 percent in 2002 and 46 percent in 1995.

–About 5 percent of women said they had experienced unwanted sexual contact, ranging from unwanted touching, attempted sexual intercourse and completed sexual intercourse. That compared with 2.7 percent in 2002 and 6.2 percent in 1995.

Officials say the huge dip in problems reported in 2002 might have been an anomaly. The survey was taken only months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on American soil, and Lipari said officials believe 9-11 had an effect on how people responded to the survey.

Perhaps ”people were likely to not take into account (the harassment) experiences that they might have had” or perhaps ”we were in a window when people were actually trying to be nicer to each other,” she said.

— Officials said active duty members gave positive marks for improvement in defense department sexual misconduct training. About 90 percent indicated they received training in the previous year on topics related to sexual harassment and sexual assault and that their training was effective.

–The 2,688 sexual assaults reported last year by people in uniform compared to 2,947 reported the year before and 2,400 in 2005.

Officials warned that changes in the method of reporting data made it difficult to compare numbers year to year.

”The minimal decrease in numbers should not be necessarily viewed as any type of indicator or change,” said Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman. ”It takes several years to develop usable trends in data.”

Reports of sexual assault reports had jumped by about 24 percent in 2006 and nearly 40 percent in 2005. Officials attributed the increases partly to more aggressive efforts to encourage victims to come forward.

— There were 181 courts-martial last year for sexual assault, 201 nonjudicial punishments and 218 other administrative actions and discharges.

— In 111 cases, commanders couldn’t take action because the case fell to a civilian court or foreign authority, in 131 cases the subject was unidentified; in 797 the charge was unsubstantiated, unfounded or there was insufficient evidence.

–572 cases are pending. The number of investigations completed don’t correspond to the number of assaults last year because some of the cases finished last year had been reported in a previous year.

Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, D-N.Y., said she is concerned that too few perpetrators are being brought to justice and not all victims are being helped.

”Even if these numbers are accurate, the problem of violence against women in the military remains pervasive,” she said in a statement.

This is the fourth year the military has compiled detailed statistics on sexual assaults. The reporting methods have changed each year, complicating efforts to evaluate progress or determine whether it is the actual assaults or the reporting that is going up or down.

The cases involved members of the military who were either victims or accused of the assaults. The military counts rape, nonconsensual sodomy, indecent assault and attempts to commit any of those as sexual assault.

Also, this is only the second full year in which the military has included in the totals sexual assaults that are filed under a program that allows victims to report the incident and receive health care or counseling services but does not notify law enforcement or commanders.

Of the 2,688 reports filed last year, 705 were initially made under that restricted program. But victims are allowed to change their minds and pursue an investigation later, and that was done in 102 of those cases, thus 603 remain restricted.

^——

On the Net:

Defense Department Sexual Assault and Prevention: http://www.sapr.mil/

February 25, 2008 – Thousands of American families have a tragic hole in their lives that may finally be filled with answers. While the Korean War ended a half century ago, more than 8,000 American families still don’t know what happened to their loved ones.

There are 8,100 Americans still listed as missing in action from the Korean War, often called America’s “forgotten war.”

Later this week, the United States may reach a deal with China that could shed some light on the mystery of the soldiers’ disappearance.

The Chinese government is expected to open its archives to American POW/MIA investigators.

During much of the Korean War, China ran six prisoner of war camps in North Korea and another smaller one in China that may also have held American POWs. In addition to these camps, China managed several holding camps during the war. It is unknown how many of the missing American servicemen may have been held in any of the camps.

A small U.S. delegation is currently in China, anticipating that a final agreement can be reached by week’s end.

“We just hope that we can find something out of these records that they have. We believe that these records will help us & and hopefully, it will help us unlock clues as to the fate of our missing,” said Capt. Mary Olsen, a spokesperson for the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO).

Once an agreement is signed later this week, U.S. officials hope a timetable can be reached soon for American investigators to begin researching the Chinese files, which DPMO has been seeking access to for years.

Though the U.S. and North Korea do not have diplomatic relations, DPMO research teams were allowed to conduct excavations for possible remains of missing servicemen at various sites in North Korea from 1996 through 2005. Those excavations were temporarily suspended in 2005, when concerns mounted over North Korea’s pursuit of a nuclear program.

“We’re hoping this will help us out. This is a very first step, and very positive,” said Olsen.

Olsen said past excavations had taken place near the sites of some of the Chinese-run POW camps.

Of the 1.7 million service members with recent combat experience, some 800,000 are now veterans entitled to VA health care and benefits. Of those, 300,000 have had treatment; 40 percent were diagnosed with a mental health problem, more than half with PTSD, according to Veterans Affairs figures released as a result of a lawsuit by Veterans for Common Sense, a nonpartisan veterans advocacy group.  Paul Sullivan, the group’s executive director, says the patient figure could eventually reach 700,000.  A recent Harvard University study says taxpayers’ cost for the care of injured veterans will run up to $700 billion. 

March 16, 2008, Washington, DC – As the Iraq war ends its fifth year, a dominant legacy of the conflict has turned out to be the human toll on those who have fought it.

The nature and sheer extent of American casualties — officially in the tens of thousands, but hundreds of thousands have sought medical help — has caught the U.S. government off guard.

From wounded soldiers who faced dilapidated conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center to troops whose mental problems have been overlooked, Iraq veterans have paid the price.

“The government was not ready for the casualties to come home,” says Brad Trower, 29, a Marine Corps veteran from High Ridge who was injured twice in his tour in Iraq.

When Trower returned to St. Louis in 2005, suffering from traumatic brain injury after two vehicles he was riding in were blown up within a month of his arrival, he got “zero response” initially from local Veterans Affairs officials, though he is now doing well.

Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, says the nation has failed to heed the lessons of Vietnam, a war whose veterans constitute half of the 400,000 people sleeping on America’s streets tonight.

Though the number of veterans today is smaller, the percentage of veterans who become homeless, commit suicide or face other social problems, partly because of a lack of treatment, is similar to that of the Vietnam era, Filner says.

“We know how to deal with it,” he says, “but we apparently don’t want to deal with it.”

Many of today’s veterans, especially reservists, are married, complicating the situation.

“The Vietnam conflict was primarily a single soldier’s conflict, but the impacts now are greater because you have entire families that are impacted by how this gets handled,” says Matthew Cary, president of Veterans & Military Families for Progress.

The backlog of disability claims has jumped to 600,000 from 300,000 with the surge of Iraq injuries, Carey says. And the Army says suicides are at their highest since it began keeping figures in 1980.

It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

The Pentagon’s “shock and awe” doctrine featuring hi-tech precision bombs was supposed to stun the Iraqis into quick submission while limiting the toll on American soldiers. The confidence only grew after Saddam Hussein’s regime fell with little resistance.

In the war’s early months, President George W. Bush was so confident that American forces faced little danger that he famously dared Iraqi insurgents to “bring it on.”

They did, with suicide bombings and improvised roadside explosives that killed or maimed thousands, extended the U.S. occupation and frustrated U.S. and Iraqi attempts to establish a stable replacement for Saddam.

Five years later, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, says she’s seeing “particularly severe and complicated injuries” among returning soldiers. Murray spoke at a news briefing late last week featuring a handful of legislators who want to raise public awareness.

Officials have begun, if in fragmented fashion, to acknowledge the need for change. Recent steps already are helping some Iraq veterans and may mean better treatment for veterans of the next battle in the war on terrorism.

“There have been shameful lessons learned over the treatment of our military,” says Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Regardless of how you feel about the war in Iraq, progress we have made in the treatment of those heroes has to be embraced as positive.”

A Pentagon official adds, “As much a tragedy as Walter Reed was, it’s spawned debate and action, and helped us cut the red tape for soldiers.”

WHY THE PROBLEMS?

Three factors are generally viewed as having combined to produce problems in care for U.S. veterans of Iraq:

— Strategic mistakes that made the war longer and more lethal, including sending too few troops, not sealing Iraq’s borders or arms depots, failing to recognize the insurgency early on and not planning how to secure the peace.

— The nature of the war. The lack of front lines made everyone vulnerable at any time, increasing the danger and stress. The insurgents’ use of improvised explosive devices has produced devastating injuries. Multiple deployments and the unprecedented use of the National Guard and Reserves increased the risks, especially of stress-related problems.

— A lack of preparedness for the volume of casualties, which overwhelmed the system. Additionally, the military missed many cases of post-traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury by relying on soldiers to come forward. Of the 1.7 million service members with recent combat experience, some 800,000 are now veterans entitled to VA health care and benefits. Of those, 300,000 have had treatment; 40 percent were diagnosed with a mental health problem, more than half with PTSD, according to Veterans Affairs figures released as a result of a lawsuit by Veterans for Common Sense, a nonpartisan veterans advocacy group.

Paul Sullivan, the group’s executive director, says the patient figure could eventually reach 700,000.

Dr. Michael Kilpatrick, a top Pentagon official overseeing care for combat troops, says that by helping reduce the stigma associated with mental problems, the military has increased the number of cases to handle. In terms of physical wounds, Kilpatrick says the military was prepared for the initial acute care but less so for the long-term rehabilitation of soldiers to return to service while dealing with family issues and spouses’ lost incomes.

Thirty-one percent of the veterans have filed disability claims, waiting on the average more than six months for them to be processed. Delays are pronounced for those who returned to small towns or rural areas in the Midwest or South far from VA facilities, as happens with many reserve troops.  A recent Harvard University study says taxpayers’ cost for the care of injured veterans will run up to $700 billion.

“Unfortunately, we are too often falling short in meeting our duty to our warriors here at home,” says Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond, R-Mo., who has pushed for improved treatment of mental health injuries.

The military is paying the price, a Pentagon official contends, for being “so good” in saving lives that would have been lost in previous wars. In Iraq, if a wounded soldier gets medical attention within a few minutes, the survival rate is 97 percent, he says. But he concedes that mental health care remains “in its infancy. If we’re moving slowly in treatment, it’s because we’re just starting to have the technology to understand how to treat PTSD and especially TBI.”

Critics contend that officials have compounded the situation. Among the most egregious actions, Filner asserts, has been diagnosing 22,000 veterans with “pre-existing personality disorders,” as reported late last year by the Post-Dispatch.

“We mess them up, then we say, ‘We didn’t mess you up, it’s your fault,’ and we hand them a bill,” Filner says.

Trower, who spent four years on active duty in the Marines before rejoining in 2004 to go to Iraq, was injured on his first day of action, when his light-armored vehicle ran over a land mine.

A month later, an explosive device hit the 14-ton vehicle he was commanding and threw it 20 feet. Trower awoke with smoke all around and men badly hurt. He was hospitalized for a week with a concussion.

He finished his tour and headed back to St. Louis. It wasn’t until 18 months later, after news stories critical of the treatment given veterans, that he began to get phone calls from officials offering help, “because they realized I hadn’t been seen by anyone.”

Now working as an EMT for a private ambulance company and serving as a volunteer firefighter, Trower hopes to become a professional firefighter.

LOOKING AHEAD

After what many experts describe as a chaotic few years marked by too few resources — though Walter Reed and other institutions have done remarkable work in areas such as prosthetics — the past year or so has seen some progress. Congressional legislation, pressure from veterans advocacy groups, continued efforts by veterans services groups and greater urgency by officials in the VA and Pentagon have moved things along.

Since August, military officials have encouraged soldiers who were near an explosion to get checked for traumatic brain injury, and Illinois and some other states have filled gaps for their own veterans. The transition between the Pentagon and VA is smoother, with record transfers being done electronically, and VA care has been extended for combat veterans.

A handful of key bills passed last year. They include efforts to prevent suicides, give wounded veterans cost-of-living adjustments, unify the disability rating system between the Pentagon and the VA and compel the military to examine personality-disorder discharges.

Much remains to be done to get mental health treatment to rural veterans or provide home care for disabled veterans, Cary says. More generally, what’s needed is a comprehensive approach to treating veterans and families, as well as better funding mechanisms. One idea, he says, would be to sell war bonds to fund care, so the public could help.

Assessments vary as to where things stand. American Legion spokeswoman Ramona Joyce says that the unconventional nature of the war led to early problems but that officials are doing better now.

“I think you learn from your mistakes as time goes on,” she says. “Yes, as far as PTSD and TBI, they didn’t catch it in the first couple of years of the war, but better late than never.”

Filner is less optimistic.

He cites a small program in his home district of San Diego, in which 30 wounded Marines were taught moviemaking. “They say, ‘Now I have a life. I was sitting around doing nothing, thinking of committing suicide.'” But it took two years to get the program approved, he says. Now he’s seeking support for a “de-boot camp” to help troops re-adjust to civilian life, but “nobody at DOD wants to talk about it.”

“It doesn’t seem like we’ve learned the lesson,” Filner says.

And Cary worries that financial concerns could impede the current progress, given the mounting war costs and the looming recession.

pdine@post-dispatch.com (202)298-6880

VCS Note: We strongly encourage our members and supporters in Florida to attend this wonderful event ~ Paul Sullivan 

March 13, 2008 – The Florida Veterans for Common Sense (FVCS) have organized a walkathon to benefit wounded veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan on Siesta Key Beach on March 30.

All funds raised by the walkathon will go to the Haley House Fund, which was created in 2004 to provide facilities for the visiting loved ones of veterans being treated by the James A. Haley Veterans Hospital.

The hospital receives more seriously injured veterans, with staff specializing in the treatment of brain and spinal cord injuries. Since patients often need several months of treatment, their families are left to handle the cost of hotels and living expenses during their recovery.

The Haley House in Brandon helps the friends and families of patients who live more than 50 miles from the Haley House and qualify for aid based upon income with living arrangements as well as the recently completed “Comfort Center,” complete with full kitchen, washer and dryer, and a TV and game area. Volunteers at Haley House have found a marked difference in a patient’s recovery with the presence of their loved ones, providing them with the necessary support system to significantly cut down on their recovery time.

As Harry Stimmel, FVCS board member and co-creator of the walkathon said, “If the parents live in Oklahoma, and they don’t have much money, we’re providing them with some kind of facility so they can visit the veteran … it can make all the difference.”

As a display of their faith in the Haley House Fund and the support that it provides to veterans and their families, each member donates the cost of a room to Haley House on his own birthday every year.

All of the local members of the Florida Veterans for Common Sense plan to participate in the walk, as well as many of the Haley House staff.

INTERESTED?

To participate in the walk, make a per-mile pledge or to make a direct donation, contact retired Air Force Lt. Col. Len Gumley, FVCS board member, at 927-0777, or mail it to him at 5408 Eagles Point Circle, Sarasota, FL 34231.

March 13, 2008 – House Chaplin Rev. Daniel P. Coughlin delivers benediction on Capitol Hill in Washington during a congressional ceremony to honor those who’ve served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

by Frank James

All the right words were spoken at today’s event to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War, an event that was also billed as an acknowledgement of the Afghan War.)

The four congressional leaders praised the troops now serving, and those who’ve lost their lives, as well as veterans. In the spirit of what was advertised beforehand as a bipartisan event, the lawmakers checked any unseemly finger-pointing at the door.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), whose office had the idea for the ceremony, said: “After five years of the war on in Iraq and more than six in Afghanistan, the selflessness of our heroes continues to make us proud.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (D-Ky.) did, however, acknowledged how divisive the Iraq War has been.

Today our nation is engaged in a great debate about the future course of that war and the greater war of which it is a part. There is passion and seriousness and patriotism on both sides. Yet one thing is certain. The men and women of our military have done their jobs. Their purpose is just.
Here’s the transcript of the ceremony:

SPEAKER PELOSI: Here in this beautiful Rotunda we solemnly remember the service of the men and women of our armed forces on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the initiation of hostilities in Iraq, and we pay tribute to all of those serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the world. When our nation called, the brave men and women of our armed forces responded without delay. When sent into battle, they performed their duties effectively with bravery, dignity and honor that are the hallmark of American soldiers, sailors, air men, Coast Guardsmen and Marines. After five years of the war on in Iraq and more than six in Afghanistan, the selflessness of our heroes continues to make us proud.

War extracts a terrible price. Just in the past three days, 12 more of our heroes have fallen in Iraq. Every loss brought pain to our hearts. Few understood the price and pain of war more deeply than America’s most celebrated soldier, Dwight David Eisenhower. The statue is the most recent addition to the Rotunda. As you can see, as you leave, as you noticed coming in, when his statute arrived many of us were surprised to see the great man depicted not as the president of the United States, but as a five-star general. His family told us that is how President General Eisenhower wanted to be presented. Everyone knew he was president; he wanted everyone to know of his military service to our country as a five-star general.

Having seen the deadliest combat in human history as well as the new destructive force which ended World War II, Eisenhower devoted his presidency to reducing the risk of war. Upon leaving office, President Eisenhower concluded his farewell address with a prayer that in, quote, “in the goodness of time all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.”

In the spirit of General Eisenhower, under the gaze of his statue’s watchful eye, we honor the service of our men and women in uniform of our armed services, those who have returned home, and their brothers and sisters in arms we’ve lost. We mourn every day. In the spirit of his farewell prayer, we seek to end conflict, to promote peace and to build a future worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform.

ANNOUNCER: Ladies and gentlemen, majority leader of the United States Senate, the honorable Harry Reid.

SEN. REID: One hundred and forty-two years ago in this hall, where we now sit and stand, laid in state a martyred body of President Abraham Lincoln. Americans came from every corner of our country that day to grieve the president and honor the ideals expressed in his second inaugural address, where he said, “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Today we stand together, not as Democrats or Republicans but as Americans, all to honor every airman, soldier, sailor and Marine who has served and every American hero who has perished in that far-off land of Iraq.

We pay special tribute to the more than 30,000 gallant Americans wounded in battle and to the 3,987 who have paid the ultimate sacrifice. We honor their parents, children, husbands, wives and friends, those they loved and those who loved them. They too bear a heavy burden in service to the ideals we cherish.

While today’s focus is on the five-year war in Iraq, we do not forget the men and women who have sacrificed in Afghanistan. We could not possibly honor our troops with words to match the honor of their brave action. But let it be known to all, from the beaches of America to the sands of Iraq, that they’re in our hearts and in our prayers; that in their honor and in their memory we will, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, always cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

ANNOUNCER: Ladies and gentlemen, Republican leader of the United States Senate, the Honorable Mitch McConnell.

SEN. MCCONNELL: Five years ago next week in the sands of Kuwait, a captain in the U.S. Army spoke some very American words to the soldiers in his command. “Do your job,” he said, “so we can all go home.” An army advanced. The war in Iraq had begun.

Today our nation is engaged in a great debate about the future course of that war and the greater war of which it is a part. There is passion and seriousness and patriotism on both sides. Yet one thing is certain. The men and women of our military have done their jobs. Their purpose is just.

And on this day of remembrance, in this place of honor, we thank all who have served. We commend all who have sacrificed to protect our nation from the cruel designs of evil men. Some have returned with wounded bodies and shaken souls. Some have not come home. Many mothers and fathers and husbands and wives and children have kept lonely vigil for loved ones. And many have wept bitter tears over a long-delayed reunion or a shattering loss of life. We have been grief-stricken in the face of injury and death. And in quiet prayers we’ve asked the Lord of Mercy to embrace the fallen in a kingdom where, as we read, every tear is wiped away.

Sixty-nine Kentuckians have given their lives in this fight. Their stories have a common theme. They loved their families and they believed their service would keep their families safe. The widow of one Kentucky soldier was asked how her husband wished to be remembered. She did not hesitate. “He loved his country,” she said. “He really believed in what he was doing in Iraq.” We have felt a solemn pride in men and women like these, in the great feats of bravery and in the small acts of kindness of our troops that we’ve heard from the front.

We’ve been humbled by the sacrifice of so many Americans. And today we recommit ourselves to their service, to the care of those who have returned and to the full support of those who fight.

We pray for those who are in the field to be strong and confident and safe from all harm, and we pray this morning also for the strength to bear new burdens that will come.

In the summer of 1861, Abraham Lincoln came to this building to speak about another war. The dome above us was half-finished, and Confederate soldiers were in striking distance of the capital city. Lincoln said that Americans had already shown they could establish and administer a government of the people. Now they had to prove that this government could be maintained in the face of an internal revolt. In the crucible of a bloody civil war, America proved it could withstand that threat.

In the century that followed, millions of Americans would rise up to beat back the threat of despots who mocked the rights of men. And in this third American century, we will prove that America is stronger than the fanatics who want to destroy it.

These years have not been easy, but we are reminded, in the words of an ancient writer, that the purpose of war is peace. And on this day of remembrance, we can be sure that as long as good and generous souls rise up to defend America, the world can hope for days of peace to come.

ANNOUNCER: Ladies and gentlemen, Republican leader of the United States House of Representatives, the Honorable John Boehner.

REP. BOEHNER: America is a nation defined by its unfailing commitment to freedom and liberty. Throughout our nation’s history, freedom and liberty have been repeatedly challenged. And throughout our nation’s history, the men and women of our military have always answered the call. And we gather today beneath the Rotunda of our Capitol to say thank you. We gather to honor the five years of service and sacrifice our troops and their families — that have made for the war in Iraq, and we gather to remember those who are serving our nation in Afghanistan and throughout the world.

Under this Rotunda, we honor our nation’s greatest heroes and we celebrate their accomplishments. The men and women of our military and their families are our nation’s greatest heroes, and their incredible accomplishments are indeed a cause for celebration. Across the globe, bolstered by their faith in God and the love of their families, American soldiers have performed heroic deeds — in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the world. They’ve built schools, they’ve — protected communities, they’ve built bridges and infrastructure, they’ve liberated the women of Kabul, they’ve liberated nations.

Their achievements are too numerous to count and too widespread to fully catalogue. The least we can do is to take time from our daily routine to stop, to think, and to express our thanks and gratitude for the sacrifices of our military families and continue — the sacrifices they continue to make.

The life of every American soldier is a precious gift. You are the pride of America. A grateful nation says thanks. And we will never, ever forget.

ANNOUNCER: Ladies and gentlemen, please stand for a moment of silence and the benediction.

(A moment of silence is observed, followed by the benediction.)

March 13, 2008 – Any way you cut it, Kyle Williams is a success story. He did two tours in Iraq and came back in one piece.

Well, sort of. A mortar attack that threw him into a wall ended his second tour a little early. He had to have surgery to his shoulder and the bottom half of his face. All in all, he looks pretty good.

And now he’s taking advantage of his veteran’s benefits to get an education.

Well, sort of. Last fall, Williams was finishing up at Sierra College and preparing to transfer to UC Davis when SN&R spoke to him about his activities as president of the Sierra College Veterans Club. He’d helped to organize The Road Home: From Combat to College and Beyond, an event to provide information and assistance for veterans who wanted to make use of their educational benefits (see “The war at home,” SN&R News, October 18, 2007).

But Williams’ transition from the two-year program at Sierra College to UC Davis’ bachelor’s program wasn’t all that seamless.

“The problem is at that at UC Davis, they count your G.I. Bill benefits as income on the FAFSA [Free Application for Federal Student Aid], and that kind of messes with your financial aid,” Williams told SN&R this week. Because Sierra College is on the semester system and UC Davis is on the quarter system, the money that the UC system counted as income had already been used to finish his work at the community college.

“It really worried me, and I had to take out a loan to get through the first quarter,” he said. “That’s got to cover all the living expenses and tuition, too, because my veteran’s benefits were already used for the last semester.”

Unlike most Americans, Williams hates to be in debt, so he’s trying to keep up with the interest payments. But then, unlike most Americans, he volunteered to serve in the military after the 9/11 attacks.

As the Iraq war marks its fifth anniversary this week, the ongoing problem with paying for veteran’s education has led Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia and a number of co-sponsors to introduce the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act. It’s also being called the “G.I. Bill for the 21st century,” because it brings benefits for all service members (including National Guard soldiers) up to the level of those enjoyed by veterans returning from World War II.

While it may seem only fair that education benefits for veterans actually cover tuition, Webb’s bill has come under unexpected fire from the Department of Defense. News reports last week quoted unnamed DOD sources as claiming that the bill might increase recruitment, but it would also devastate retention of trained troops.

Apparently, veterans can’t wait to get an education. Last fall’s Road Home, a combination of keynote speakers on veterans’ issues and a chance to meet with other vet-services providers, was hugely successful. But the real test of any outreach is how well it works down the road.

After all, we’re still busy making veterans. There are currently more than 150,000 U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq, with another 27,000 in Afghanistan, according to reports from news sources and the Department of Defense.

When they get home, those vets have to navigate an often confusing system in order to use the benefits they’ve earned for college. What’s more, veterans are often dealing with other readjustment issues: disability from injuries, including traumatic brain injury, a form of closed head trauma associated with the large number of concussions that soldiers in these wars have received from IED explosions; mental-health issues ranging from combat stress to post-traumatic stress disorder; the difficulty of attempting to get on their feet financially after a long absence from the workforce; family difficulties, beginning with the long absence and exacerbated by the stress of war.

As the experience of Vietnam veterans amply demonstrates, these folks don’t get as much assistance as we might expect a grateful nation would provide. Oh, the services are there—mostly—but vets have to find them. Then they have to jump through the right hoops to make sure that they get all the help they qualify for—and that they don’t get slapped with a bill for it.

Enter the best source of help for a veteran: other veterans. That was the whole theory behind The Road Home last October, and it’s one that works.

Catherine Morris, a veterans counselor with student services at Sierra College, worked with Williams when he was enrolled there. Veterans may start school with difficulties that need to be addressed, Morris told SN&R, but the worst thing possible is to leave them alone to figure it out themselves. A veteran of three branches of service—she stayed out of the Navy because she hates to wear white—Morris said that the “worst thing you can do to a vet is to isolate them.”

“The camaraderie is so critical in the military,” she said. “It’s what keeps you sane. And when you get discharged, it’s just instantly gone.” The goal in serving returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, she said, is to find ways “to provide that sense of camaraderie again, and a place to process and to get professional support if they need it.”

Morris meets with every one of her veteran students at Sierra College for a minimum of an hour, assessing their individual needs. Then she follows up, tracking the support necessary to give them a fighting chance at collegiate success.

What’s more, she works with faculty members to educate them about “what’s going on with veterans.” Morris and her colleagues have held workshops on veterans’ issues for interested faculty members, and it’s already paying off. A professor who’d been through one workshop noticed that a student who was an Iraq vet was doing everything he was supposed to do in class, but seemed to be having problems concentrating. She referred him to Morris, who discovered he’d had three concussions in Iraq.

“So immediately, with the three concussions, I suspect TBI,” Morris said. “I called the VA’s [Veterans Affairs] local OIF/OEF [Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom] coordinator, and he was able to get this young man into the right program right away.”

That’s the sort of assistance veterans need—speedy, but not intrusive. Veterans are sensitive—and rightly so—about the way they’re perceived. The last thing a guy like Williams, or any other veteran, wants is to be thought of as “the psycho vet.”

“The term is ‘broken’ in the military,” said Williams. “And that can mean anything from your leg doesn’t work right to you’re not sleeping at night.” Rather than be identified as broken, a lot of veterans ignore problems or push them away as minor.

“We don’t have to do everything for these vets,” Morris said, pointing out that the men and women who’ve served in the armed forces are among the most competent and resourceful around. “We don’t have to fix them. But if we know how to get them to the right place, they can get what they need.”

Sierra College is only reaching the 225 veterans enrolled there, however. What about the rest? VA statistics show there are more than 22,000 veterans under the age of 40 in the greater Sacramento area.

The good news is that last fall’s Road Home program started the ball rolling for local veterans groups and other service providers. Since then, representatives of these groups have been meeting under the auspices of an umbrella group, the Sacramento Veterans Community Support Network, to communicate with each other and work together to reach out to area veterans. The hope was that, if the issues of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans were addressed immediately, crisis situations such as homelessness and severe mental-health problems could be avoided.

Among other things, SVCSN will be making a series out of The Road Home. The next is planned for September 19, at American River College, which has had its enrollment of veterans increase by nearly 17 percent since 2004, according to information obtained from the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

The local support network hopes to generate the sort of quick referrals that Sierra College is able to make for its students, and the service won’t be limited to recent vets from Iraq and Afghanistan. The group is working on a Web site that they hope will help all vets find the right resources just by filling out a questionnaire.

And, of course, as knowledge expands within the veteran community of the services that are available, its ability to help individuals increases as well.

Robert Bradley, the site director for the Sacramento Veterans Resource Center, told SN&R that SVCSN, which was already forming at the time of Sierra College’s Road Home program, saw it as exactly the sort of program that needed to happen regularly. “Instead of having one a year, we need to have one every quarter,” he said. “As this flood of veterans returns from overseas, we need to be ready to meet them with the information and assistance they need.”

The network has involved the Los Rios Community College system, Sac State, the University of Phoenix and several occupational schools in planning. The event in September will be “an opportunity to present administrators and faculty with the particular challenges that this new wave of vets is facing, and really beginning to discuss how we can shape what we’re doing in education to meet these needs,” said Bradley. Future events will focus on strengthening veterans’ clubs on campuses and making sure that each school has a counselor who is a veteran.

Back at UC Davis, Williams is adjusting both to a new, bigger campus and to a higher level of academic demands. He’s pleased that the work he did on The Road Home has borne such fruit, and he intends to become involved with the veterans group at UCD. But for now, he is directing his attention to adjusting to the changes.

And he’s having a little trouble concentrating. “I’m having some problems with attention,” he said. “It was never a problem before I went in the service, but I don’t want to assume it’s related to the head injury.” He lost consciousness in the explosion that disabled him. His face is fine, he says, but he still has problems with his shoulder and “sometimes, I’ll be sitting in class and find I’m not able to concentrate on what’s going on.” He’s quick to assure that “it’s not like flashbacks or all the bad stuff, it’s just a change that concerns me.”

Last fall at the conference, several other vets urged Williams to get checked for TBI. He had too much going on to get in for a CT scan. He’s making appointments with a VA hospital for spring break, when he’ll have time.

Right now, though, he’s got a paper due.

March 12, 2008 – With March 20 marking the fifth anniversary of the United States-led invasion of Iraq, it’s time to take stock of what has happened.

In our new book The Three Trillion Dollar War, Harvard’s Linda Bilmes and I conservatively estimate the economic cost of the war to the U.S. to be $3 trillion, and the costs to the rest of the world to be another $3 trillion – far higher than the Bush administration’s estimates before the war.

The Bush team not only misled the world about the war’s possible costs, but has also sought to obscure the costs as the war has gone on.

This is not surprising. After all, the Bush administration lied about everything else, from Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction to his supposed link with Al Qaeda. Indeed, only after the U.S.-led invasion did Iraq become a breeding ground for terrorists.

The Bush administration said the war would cost $50 billion. The U.S. now spends that amount in Iraq every three months.

To put that number in context: For one-sixth of the cost of the war, the U.S. could put its social security system on a sound footing for more than a half-century, without cutting benefits or raising contributions.

Moreover, the Bush administration cut taxes for the rich as it went to war, despite running a budget deficit. As a result, it has had to use deficit spending – much of it financed from abroad – to pay for the war.

This is the first war in American history that has not demanded some sacrifice from citizens through higher taxes; instead, the entire cost is being passed onto future generations.

Unless things change, the U.S. national debt – which was $5.7 trillion when Bush became president – will be $2 trillion higher because of the war (in addition to the $800 billion increase under Bush before the war).

Was this incompetence or dishonesty?

Almost surely both.

Cash accounting meant that the Bush administration focused on today’s costs, not future costs, including disability and health care for returning veterans.

Only years after the war began did the administration order the specially armoured vehicles that would have saved the lives of many killed by roadside bombs.

Not wanting to reintroduce a draft, and finding it difficult to recruit for an unpopular war, troops have been forced into two, three or four stress-filled deployments.

The administration has tried to keep the war’s costs from the American public. Veterans groups have used the Freedom of Information Act to discover the total number of injured – 15 times the number of fatalities.

Already, 52,000 returning veterans have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. The U.S. government will need to provide disability compensation to an estimated 40 per cent of the 1.65 million troops that have already been deployed.

And, of course, the bleeding will continue as long as the war continues, with the health-care and disability bill amounting to more than $600 billion (in present-value terms).

Ideology and profiteering have also played a role in driving up the war’s costs. America has relied on private contractors, which have not come cheap.

A Blackwater Security guard can cost more than $1,000 per day, not including disability and life insurance, which is paid for by the government.

When unemployment rates in Iraq soared to 60 per cent, hiring Iraqis would have made sense; but the contractors preferred to import cheap labour from Nepal, the Philippines and other countries.

The war has had only two winners: oil companies and defence contractors. The stock price of Halliburton, Vice-President Dick Cheney’s old company, has soared. But even as the government turned increasingly to contractors, it reduced its oversight.

The largest cost of this mismanaged war has been borne by Iraq. Half of Iraq’s doctors have been killed or have left the country, unemployment stands at 25 per cent and, five years after the war’s start, Baghdad still has less than eight hours of electricity a day.

Out of Iraq’s total population of around 28 million, 4 million are displaced and 2 million have fled the country.

The thousands of violent deaths have inured most Westerners to what is going on: A bomb blast that kills 25 hardly seems newsworthy anymore.

But statistical studies of death rates before and after the invasion tell some of the grim reality. They suggest additional deaths from a low of around 450,000 in the first 40 months of the war (150,000 of them violent deaths) to 600,000.

With so many people in Iraq suffering so much in so many ways, it may seem callous to discuss the economic costs.

And it may seem particularly self-absorbed to focus on the economic costs to America, which embarked on this war in violation of international law. But the economic costs are enormous, and they go well beyond budgetary outlays.

Americans like to say that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Nor is there such a thing as a free war. The U.S. – and the world – will be paying the price for decades to come.

Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001 Nobel Prize in economics, is professor of economics at Columbia University and co-author, with Linda Bilmes, of The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Costs of the Iraq Conflict.

“Some science is showing that that DU, when inhaled or gets in a wound, can cause long-term health problems because it is a heavy metal and radioactive,” said Paul Sullivan, director of the advocacy group Veterans for Common Sense. But he acknowledged that studies are limited.

March 16, 2008, Duluth, Minnesota – What you first notice about John Marshall is his haircut, buzzed bald on the sides and back of his head, with the top shaved in a way that suggests an arrow pointing at you. It’s unusual, and when asked about it, Marshall smiles as if to admit as much, but he says he just wanted a reminder of who he was at his strongest and most proud, a servant of his country.

“I miss the military,” he says in a slow, calm voice.

Beyond the haircut, you don’t see anything more than a 37-year-old man who looks relatively healthy, able and normal. He lives in an immaculate home in Duluth’s Riverside neighborhood. Pictures of his family are interspersed in his living room with black-and-white photos of relatives and paintings of Jesus and various saints. What you don’t see is the pain he has, which he says is constant and rumbles all over his body.

John Marshall of Duluth, a veteran from the first Gulf War, was exposed to depleted uranium from a friendly fire shell. Seventeen years later, he is completely disabled. Marshall sits in the dining room of his home in Duluth’s Riverside neighborhood with the 19 prescription drugs he has to take to manage pain and deal with the illnesses he believes are side-effects from exposure to depleted uranium. [Clint Austin / News Tribune]

“I wouldn’t wish this on anybody,” he said. “It’s tough, man. It’s tough.”

Like many veterans, his war story is at the ready, and in an instant he’ll tell you in rat-a-tat-tat cadence about when he was a 20-year-old Army corporal with visions of a lifetime in the military and was quickly moving up the ranks, despite not finishing high school.

He was serving on the front lines in the Gulf War, which lasted more than 100 days. His tour lasted just 82 hours.

Marshall was part of a nine-man Bradley Fighting Vehicle squad that on Feb. 27, 1991, was hit by a friendly fire tank shell containing depleted uranium, a radioactive metal used in U.S. weapons and armor. As he tried to make his way to an enemy bunker, he believes shrapnel containing depleted uranium pierced his back and lungs.

Marshall blames uranium he inhaled and that lodged in his lungs for numerous health problems that have left him completely disabled, ending his career in the military and requiring him to take 19 prescribed medicines.

“Once I lost my health and my career, I lost my identity as a man,” he said.

Marshall and his story stand in direct contradiction to a government study begun in 1993 of about 80 veterans exposed to depleted uranium.

“To date,” according to the military’s Force Health and Protection division Web site, “there have been no adverse clinical effects noted in these individuals related to DU; specifically, there has been no kidney damage, leukemia, bone or lung cancer, or other uranium-related health effects.”

Marshall is one of the veterans who have taken part in that study.

“This infuriates me. This whole situation just infuriates me,” he said. “All I want is for them to acknowledge this. I want validation.”

Marshall is speaking out, hoping for just that, joining a list of organizations vocal about the perceived dangers of depleted uranium. But he has an uphill battle, as the U.S. government, along with other prominent groups such as NATO and the World Health Organization, claim that depleted uranium exposure is harmless. It is a debate that recently has fallen mostly quiet, even as rounds containing depleted uranium continue to be used in Iraq and a chorus of activists call for it to be stopped.

Cancer at 20

For Marshall, the pain is often so intense that it’s a struggle to get out of bed. There are days he wants to give in to the pain and the agoraphobia brought on by his post-traumatic stress disorder. To stay busy, he said, is the only way to fight the demons that would consume him if he let them.

He is a member of 20 service organizations, ranging from the VFW to the American Legion to the Disabled American Veterans, the Duluth Memorial Hall Committee, as well as a member of the Shriners, the Scottish Rite and the council president of his church. But he is most active as commander of the Duluth Combined Honor Guard, for which he travels to 120 to 130 funerals a year to provide veterans with a military burial. His service on the honor guard has seen him at the state Capitol, where he successfully lobbied for increased funding for his volunteer group. He also has helped other veterans receive medals owed to them for their combat.

“His wellness comes from serving other veterans,” said Phil Ringstrom, a counselor with the Duluth Vets Center.

As a result, he has become one of the best-known and well-respected members of the Duluth veteran’s community.

“He’s one of the most dedicated people I’ve ever met,” said Durbin Keeney, regional director of the Minnesota Assistance Council Duluth. “I’d trust John with my life, on or off the battlefield.”

To Marshall, it’s also a way to serve a veterans community and a country he loves fiercely. He doesn’t feel the same way about the military, by whom he feels betrayed.

“I love this country,” he said. “But I’m not very proud of it right now.”

Almost immediately after being exposed to depleted uranium, Marshall said he started getting strange rashes and illnesses. A few months later, a tumor started growing on the left side of his neck. At first, he said, doctors dismissed it as benign, but he said it grew larger. It was biopsied in November 1991 and discovered to be lymphatic cancer. He was still 20.

Radiation treated the cancer, but other problems developed, including more rashes, stomach ulcers, a failed thyroid gland, high blood pressure, a weakened immune system, tachycardia — which causes rapid pulse rates — fibromyalgia and severe arthritis. He now has symptoms of Parkinson’s disease and multiple sclerosis such as twitching and memory loss. And then there are the mental-health problems — the depression, the PTSD, the panic and anxiety attacks and the anger-control issues he deals with. He will soon be tested for traumatic brain injury.

Veterans Administration documents confirm his diagnoses.

He believes that the Army has been slow to acknowledge his illnesses, if at all. It wasn’t until a suicide attempt in 1997 that the Veterans Administration granted him full disability, but he said he still has to fight to get tests and medications.

“Nothing is ever easy,” he said.

And he said no one has given him an official explanation for why he has become so sick.

Studies ‘inconclusive’

Part of that is because of the controversy surrounding depleted uranium, which is enriched from natural uranium for use in nuclear reactors, according to the military’s office of public health and environmental hazards. Depleted uranium is twice as dense as lead, cheaper to produce and can pierce armor, making it a highly effective weapon.

When it hits a target it ignites and burns, spreading a toxic dust into the environment. It was first used in the Gulf War, where the office of public health said 320 tons was used. The number of soldiers like Marshall who had the highest risk of exposure because they were in or near vehicles struck by depleted uranium was 110, said Dr. Michael Kilpatrick, deputy director of the Force Health Protection & Readiness Department.

As of three years ago, Kilpatrick said, about 125 tons of depleted uranium was used in Iraq during the current war. Data since that point is classified, he said, but he said of the 2,200 soldiers tested for exposure, 10 were found to have positive levels of depleted uranium in their body.

The study Marshall is involved in, conducted at the University of Maryland at Baltimore, requires participants to be tested every two years for uranium in their body. Kilpatrick described the study as “the only data we have on people inhaling the dust.”

He said the results have shown no correlation between depleted uranium exposure and health problems.

“I’ve talked [with the study director] on a regular basis and have not seen anything that would change what I’ve been saying over the years,” he said.

Kilpatrick said everyone carries uranium in their bodies, and that uranium found in everyday soil is more toxic than depleted uranium. He couldn’t comment on Marshall’s situation, but he said there are many injured soldiers from the Gulf War who have unexplained illnesses.

Some believe that the military’s studies are inconclusive, or just wrong.

“Some science is showing that that DU, when inhaled or gets in a wound, can cause long-term health problems because it is a heavy metal and radioactive,” said Paul Sullivan, director of the advocacy group Veterans for Common Sense. But he acknowledged that studies are limited.

A 2000 report by the private, nonprofit Institute of Medicine reviewed studies on depleted uranium and its health effects and found, according to Abigail Mitchell, a senior program officer with the institute, that there was inadequate or insufficient data to find a link between the two.

Mitchell said since then new studies have come out and the Institute of Medicine is doing another review, which will be released in June.

Others believe the military hasn’t been willing to fully research the effects of DU.  “It’s a very powerful weapon and they don’t want to give it up,” said Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington. “They’re having trouble forcing themselves to look at the effects of this very powerful weapon.”

McDermott was successful in pushing legislation that called for a new report to be done on the depleted uranium studies. That report, released last year, said studies have been inconclusive.

“My feeling is perhaps we’re looking at another Agent Orange,” McDermott said, referring to a defoliant used in the Vietnam War later found to cause serious illness in U.S. soldiers. “The military denied and denied and denied until they finally had a study that found out it was toxic. I don’t want to go down that road.”

The truth about the issue, said Sullivan, is probably somewhere in the middle.

“Unfortunately, the debate has fractured into the pro-DU and anti-DU, and that doesn’t serve veterans very well,” he said.

To Marshall, there’s no question about the effects of depleted uranium, and he worries that it might also affect his children. Two of his three children are biological, and they have started showing some strange illnesses and rashes.

He said he plans to become more of an activist and voice on the issue not only in Duluth, but on the state and national levels.

“If I can hold people accountable — if I can hold the government accountable — then that’s what I’ll have to do,” he said. “If this is happening to me, it’s happening to others. That’s my biggest concern.”