Norton Bill Filed Today to Reverse Walter Reed Closing Has the Necessary Support - March 8, 2007

Washington, DC-In the wake of testimony by Army officials at hearings on substandard outpatient health care and conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC), including instability and difficulty in hiring and retaining staff because of a closing plan, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) today introduced a bill to prohibit the closing of the base.  The "Preserve Walter Reed Hospital Act of 2007" would reverse the 2005 recommendation of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) to close Walter Reed and merge it with the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.  Norton said that the disruptions that have surfaced during hearings and were reported in The Washington Post call for this rare reversal "to stop the proverbial bleeding of staff and talent...and to stop the madness of closing the nation's most vital and best military hospital in the middle of a shooting war and the war on terrorism." She said that Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, had assured her the necessary language to ensure that Walter Reed does not close will be in his bill and that the appropriate authorizers had agreed to the necessary language.

        Norton questioned top military brass Monday at a field hearing of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on the base, including Army Vice Chief of Staff General Richard Cody, who said that the planned closure had made it difficult to hire and keep personnel.  Norton is particularly concerned about the drain on vital civilian clinical and medical personnel at a time when Walter Reed is receiving large numbers of injured soldiers and a military surge may mean many more.

        Since the BRAC recommendation, Norton has doubted that the administration or Congress would come forward with the required two billion dollars to construct the proposed new Walter Reed in Bethesda in the foreseeable future, and much more for moving costs and new equipment.  Now she believes a new hospital will not be built in the foreseeable future, given the huge and mounting deficit, and "certainly not in the middle of a war when funds must be committed to soldiers, their families, veterans and the war itself."  Several Members of Congress on the relevant committees have since publicly agreed.

        Norton said that leaving Walter Reed on the BRAC list sends promises Congress cannot keep to build a new hospital by 2011.  She said that there have been no complaints about care and conditions at the main hospital, "but the hearing laid bare a broken military health care outpatient system and bureaucracy in need of both long term and short term remedies," and the hospital's administrative outpatient care and facilities have rapidly become "a potent symbol of a national breakdown."  A first step to take here, she said, is to reverse the closing of WRAMC to help stabilize personnel who, as the generals testified, scatter once they believe a base will close.  Norton said her bill is necessary because, if Walter Reed is listed for closing, vital clinical and medical personnel will increasingly leave or avoid the hospital, which testimony showed is already occurring. 

        The Congresswoman also said that Walter Reed is an essential and integral component of the Emergency Preparedness Plan for the nation's capital, in close proximity to the White House, the Capitol and tourists attractions and is central to plans to treat mass casualties during a possible terrorist attack in the city or region, in contrast to Bethesda, which is separated from the region by distance and traffic.

        Acknowledging that reversing a BRAC decision "is and should be rare,"  Norton said, "the question should not be can we take Walter Reed off the closing list but, why was this hospital scheduled to close in the first place, as our soldiers were engaged in a shooting war with no end in sight? Another question should be do we truly intend to spend billions of dollars on bricks and mortar for a new hospital instead of on our soldiers and their current facilities?"

        Norton's full statement of introduction follows.

        At the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on March 5, 2007 at Walter Reed Army Hospital, I asked the top brass who testified whether designating Walter Reed for closing in the midst of a war had contributed to any instability of personnel at the Walter Reed Hospital Garrison. Each of them responded unequivocally that the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) closing for Walter Reed, had had a destabilizing effect on the hospital. Army Vice Chief of Staff General Richard Cody testified "You're trying to get the best people to come here to work, and they know in three years that this place will close down and they're not sure whether they will be afforded the opportunity to move to the new Walter Reed National Military Center...- that causes some issues." This and other testimony, as well as recent Washington Post revelations, have contributed directly to my introduction today of the "Preserve Walter Reed Army Medical Center Act of 2007." Several senior leaders of the relevant committees have since agreed that Walter Reed should be taken off the BRAC list and should remain open.

        There have been no complaints about the hospital's world-class treatment or the hospital itself, which was built only in 1977, but the hearing laid bare a broken military health care outpatient system and bureaucracy in need of both long term and short term remedies. The epicenter of this system is its "crown jewel" Walter Reed Hospital, whose physical and administrative outpatient care have rapidly become a potent symbol of a national breakdown that will require systemic remedies for military and veteran hospitals across the country. However, because the problems are both deep and wide, we must find immediate solutions at each facility while the military outpatient systems are freed from knotted bureaucratic tangles.  

        A first step to take to stop the proverbial bleeding of staff and talent is to reverse the madness of closing the nation's best and most vital military hospital in the middle of a shooting war and the war on terrorism. This bill to reverse the closing of the Walter Reed base will help stabilize personnel who, as the generals testified, scatter once they believe a base will close.  At a time when Walter Reed is receiving large numbers of injured soldiers and a military surge may mean many more, closing the nation's premier military hospital should be unthinkable.

          Moreover, leaving Walter Reed on the BRAC list has become increasingly untenable because closing the hospital carries with it a promise and an intention to build a new hospital by 2011. In the foreseeable future, no one expects the administration or Congress to come forward with the required two billion dollars to construct the proposed new Walter Reed in Bethesda, Maryland, and much more for moving costs and new equipment, given the huge and mounting deficit, and certainly not in the middle of a war when funds must be committed to soldiers, their families, veterans and the war itself. Nevertheless, a repeal bill is necessary because, if Walter Reed continues to be listed for closing, Congress will continue to send a signal to personnel to make their career decisions accordingly. As is already occurring, Walter Reed will find it increasingly difficult to retain and hire personnel, including vital civilian clinical and medical personnel, particularly the very best; who the nation expects will work at Walter Reed to attend to the most seriously injured military men and women.

        Further, Walter Reed is an essential and integral component of the Emergency Preparedness Plan for the nation's capital. The hospital is located just 5 ½ miles from the White House, 6 ½ miles from the Capitol and 6 miles from the Washington Convention Center. Its location in the city is strategically important. If moved to Bethesda, traffic and distance would place Walter Reed outside of the homeland security system here that has been developed specifically to take account of the location of the top-tier federal presence, officials and employees. Because of the location here Walter Reed is essential to treat mass casualties in the case of a terrorist attack. The hospital is part of the Emergency Preparedness Plan for the District, a system for treatment of acute illness or trauma of people requiring hospitalization from a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or explosive incident. The specialized needs are above the District's hospital capacity. Thus, the District needs Walter Reed's available resources in order to comply with this Department of Homeland Security mandate.

        I fully recognize that reversing a BRAC decision is and should be rare. However, particularly after what we have learned about unmet needs for injured members of the military returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan, this step is minimally necessary to stabilize operations at the nation's most important hospital base for caring for our most seriously injured members of the military.  Far from establishing a precedent, no other military facility stands on the same footing or has so central a mission. The question should not be can we take Walter Reed off the closing list but, why was this hospital scheduled to close in the first place, as our soldiers were engaged in a shooting war with no end in sight? Another question should be do we truly intend to spend billions of dollars on bricks and mortar for a new hospital instead of on our soldiers and their current facilities?

        Walter Reed, like other military hospitals, will not be what it should be immediately. However, we can immediately demonstrate that Congress means business by moving to stabilize the nation's premier military medical hospital and then getting on with the rest of the job.