Dave Winfield represents American Legion Baseball at its best. In an era where baseball literature consists of tabloid tomes such as Jose Canseco’s “Juiced” and David Wells’ “Perfect I’m Not,” Winfield’s book, “Dropping the Ball” is more Thomas Aquinas than Jerry Springer.

Even though this major league Hall of Famer had legendary battles with Yankees’ owner George Steinbrenner and once played for Billy Martin, you will find no dirt in this literary work. The former American Legion Baseball star uses the book to tout his proposal, “The Baseball United Plan,” because, Winfield says, “The game I love is hurting.” If you want to read about clubhouse fights, big league cheaters or drunks of the baseball diamond, buy a different book. Winfield is a man with a plan. Now a vice president of the San Diego Padres, Winfield recently spoke with The American Legion Magazine.

Q: What is “Baseball United?”

A: I call it a check-up and a prescription for our national pastime. There is a disconnect in the game that I summarize in the book. Under that disconnect, there are “three Cs.” One is competition. One is cost. And one is continuity. This is why I titled the book, “Dropping the Ball.” Baseball for a long time was passed from father-to-son, generation-to-generation, seamlessly. It didn’t cost anything. Now Parks and Recs don’t have budgets to support baseball and there are other sports that have come into that vacuum. When I grew up baseball was huge – the primary sport in America. And there was little competition. Now, this isn’t the case. Football began to have more importance in America – people didn’t think the Super Bowl would succeed. People didn’t aspire to be an NBA player. College sports were nowhere near as large as it is today with March Madness. There were no such things as video games and kids in America could go outside and play for hours at a time unsupervised. Society has changed.

A lot of places today don’t even have baseball teams that are of primary importance or competitive, especially at public schools So America is looking at two separate but unequal paths to playing baseball. If you grew up in an urban area with an under-funded Parks and Recreation department, you have little chance of playing good baseball. I offer suggestions and that’s what the book is about. It doesn’t just lament the changes – millions and millions still play it – it is still the best team sport. It’s the best for building community and if by chance you are the one in an a million that reaches the top, everything is better for you as a baseball player than in the other sports. Longevity, benefits, pay and long-term health.

Baseball may never regain its universal position in sports because some communities have adopted basketball and some have adopted football. Some have adopted soccer. So there is competition not only for the sports entertainment dollar, but for what the communities want to do. It may be the strength of an American Legion program or a Parks and Recs department. It may be the strength of a small businessman or a large corporation saying we are going to establish an area where we have fields designated for youth baseball, at each level, with consistency of coaching, moving to the next level, consistency on the fields. I address the fact that there are so many Latin American players. People don’t know that academies have started 30 years ago in other countries and they have really taken root and taken hold. There are also different governing laws about the way you can draft or own the rights of kids in foreign countries. It’s less expensive for Major League Baseball to develop talent over there. In our minor league system over 40 percent are foreign players. I am not saying it’s bad or good. It’s just what is happening. I wrote a chapter on the last black major leaguer. How come African American players aren’t playing? In 10 years if the trend lines stay the same, there will be one person left. Some say that maybe they just don’t like the game anymore, but I was also looking at it from a business standpoint. African Americans have the second most spending power in America, over 700 billion dollars.

Q: You have always been anti-drug. Is Barry Bonds a legitimate homerun champion?

A: I am not going to answer that. The public is conflicted about the top players. People are conflicted about ‘should I support them?’ ‘should I like them?’ or ‘do I want my kids to be like them?’ It’s hard to say. Maybe 50-50 say ‘I don’t know if it was assisted by drugs or something I can’t condone,’ and that’s the image people have of baseball and our top players. When we look back 10 years from now, we will look back from 1996-2006 as an era that’s suspect. Some argue that the drugs weren’t illegal in the sport at the time. I say, ‘Hey, the drugs were illegal in America. If you were transporting, selling or using them, you can go to jail. So they were illegal. That’s not a defense.’

Q: Has free agency been good for the game?

A: It’s been good for the players. I started when players didn’t have free agency, arbitration, multi-year contracts or good pensions. And I was part of the Players Association when it was negotiating benefits and made the leap where you could make a livelihood out of baseball. There is always good and bad in change. Cities complain that they don’t know their players but they do have more of an ability to move out of the quagmire of mediocrity by obtaining different players.

Q: As an official with the San Diego Padres, tell me about the young Iraq War veteran that your organization has signed, Cooper Brannan.

A: It’s a great story. A pitcher that has been in the military. The Padres have the best military-marketing of any ballclub. Even when I was there in the 70s they were always out there on Sunday and making the ‘hoorah’ noise. They were always part of our landscape so we had a great deal of respect for them. It would be a great, great story should he make it to the major leagues.

Q: Did American Legion Baseball contribute to your development as a player?

A: It absolutely did. It was a very positive experience for me. It was a proud time for our community too, because we had some pretty good teams and gained some recognition. It was just part of the youth baseball experience that brought our community close together – the families, the kids, the experiences of growing up. It was valuable. I had good coaching and we had good teams. The American Legion tournaments contributed to me getting the college scholarships and being drafted by Major League Baseball.

Interview: John Raughter

Retired Marine Capt. Dale A. Dye, right, delivers an American Legion plaque to director Steven Spielberg. Legionnaires selected "Saving Private Ryan," as the "best war film ever" during a recent survey by The American Legion Magazine. Spielberg directed the 1998 film, in which Dye acted and provided military advice. The two are currently working on "The Pacific War," a companion piece to the widely acclaimed "Band of Brothers." Photo by David James

By John Raughter

It may not have the notoriety of Cannes, but then again, film-maker Michael Moore probably would not be enthusiastically received at the GI Film Festival anyway.

The four-day event held at the Ronald Reagan Center in Washington May 25-28 featured 22 films and a smattering of celebrity appearances ranging from entertainer Pat Boone to former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Richard B. Myers.

Billed as the first of its kind, founders Brandon Millet and Laura Law-Millet wanted the event to showcase the heroism of America’s military. Brandon feels especially connected to the military since his wife, Laura, is a U.S. Army veteran and a graduate of West Point.

“Simply put, it occurred to us as we followed closely the public debate over the current war in Iraq, that sometimes in the political tussle over this particular conflict or that, the successes and sacrifices of our men and women in uniform get lost. We wanted to remember and we wanted others to remember with us,” the Millets said in a written message to festival attendees. “In doing a bit of research, we were surprised to find that among the hundreds of film festivals held each year, not one of them specifically focused on the military. And so, the GI Film Festival was born.”

Director John Dahl, whose film “The Great Raid” accurately portrayed the rescue of more than 500 men held in a Japanese POW camp, hosted a special screening of his film. He recalled that the original script called for a few Rambo-type characters to pull off the mission rather than the U.S. Army’s 6th Ranger Battalion that actually did it.

“The most difficult challenge in portraying real military stories in a Hollywood film is the temptation to amp up the action, consolidate characters and oversimplify the strategy,” Dahl said.

The festival featured several panels which in a very unHollywood-like fashion were unscripted and often morphed into discussions about politics and the media. Former Marine R. Lee Ermey, an actor best-known as the tough as nails drill instructor in “Full Metal Jacket,” had strong opinions about both.

“We need to support the troops no matter what the Communist News Network says. When you hear Sen. Harry Reid say we lost the war, how do you suppose that makes the troops feel?” he said. “You keep seeing the story of the young lady who threatened an Iraqi prisoner with a dog, but when an American soldier is killed and dragged through the streets naked it’s only a one-day story. They’re telling us half the story which is why we lost in Vietnam. The media will say we are losing the war but we are not losing the war.”

Best-selling author Andrew Carroll said that some in the media are afraid that by reporting the heroism of the troops they are somehow legitimizing the war. “Everytime we see a story on Rosie O’Donnell, Paris Hilton or Anna Nicole, we are not reading about the heroes of Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Country music artist Michael Peterson performed his song “It’s Who We Are” at the festival and used the event as a location to interview celebrities for his fundraising efforts for The American Legion’s American Legacy Scholarship Fund. “I think it’s fantastic to take that slice of American life and highlight it at this time in America’s history,” Peterson said of the GI Film Festival.

“CSI NY” star Gary Sinise accepted the festival’s “GI Spirit Award.” Sinise has entertained thousands of troops as the bass guitarist for the “Lt. Dan Band,” a group named after his role as a Vietnam war double amputee in “Forrest Gump.”

Sinise recalled his recent visit to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. “One of the soldiers said he was like Lt. Dan now. It was a bad joke, I know, but there is nothing funny about the outstanding job that these brave men and women are doing.”

Although the appropriateness of honoring the military on Memorial Day weekend is obvious, it likely had an adverse impact on attendance. Nonetheless, Brandon Millet said that he is committed to continuing the event because of the strong support he received by those who came.

“There is no doubt given the enthusiastic response we received this year that we struck a chord with the GI Film Festival,” he said. “We look forward to building on our successes next year and in the years to come.”

Legionnaires Vote ‘Saving Pvt. Ryan’ Best War Film

Legionnaires from across the nation voted “Saving Private Ryan” as the “Best War Movie Ever,” in a poll sponsored by The American Legion Magazine. The results were announced at the GI Film Festival in Washington May 27.

Readers were invited to write their choice for best war film in a letter or e-mail to the magazine. Since there were no pre-selected nominees or printed ballots, 71 films received at least one vote. The cultural divide between veterans and nonveterans seemed apparent when critically acclaimed films such as MASH, Apocalypse Now and The Deer Hunter failed to receive any votes.

Dale Dye, a military advisor and an actor in “Saving Private Ryan,” accepted a plaque from The American Legion, which he later delivered to director Steven Spielberg. The plaque’s inscription, signed by National Commander Paul A. Morin, said, “No one knows the cost of war better than those who have experienced it. That firsthand experience by America’s wartime veterans have made them the foremost experts in judging the accuracy and credibility of American war films. It is with great pleasure that the men and women of The American Legion, as indicated by a recent survey, name Saving Private Ryan as “The Best War Film Ever.”

The Legion’s Top 10

Saving Private Ryan

Private Ryan may have been snubbed by the Academy but it was not overlooked by members of The American Legion. The 1998 film was nominated for Best Picture but failed to bring home the Oscar when it was beat by “Shakespeare in Love.”

The movie, which starred Tom Hanks and Matt Damon, was not without its critics, even among Legionnaires who questioned the mission. The wisdom of risking the lives of many men to find one in an effort to spare a mother’s loss of an additional son to the war, was also doubted by one of the film’s characters. “Don’t we all have mothers?” groused Pvt. Reiben.

Retired Marine Capt. Dale Dye, who served as the film’s technical advisor, acknowledged some imperfections such as the shining rank insignia worn by Hanks and the conversations that occurred while men walked on patrol.

“Reality can sometimes be boring and you have to have dialog to keep the film moving,” Dye said.

What makes this film special, according to many of the voters, is the heroism and horror depicted in the D-Day landing and the bond shared by those who fought alongside each other.

“My vote for ‘Best War Movie Ever’ is ‘Saving Private Ryan,’” wrote John Gerfen of Ballwin, Mo. “Certainly there are a lot of very good movies that exemplify the spirit of U.S. fighting men and women. However, this one movie showed the brutality of war and the courage it took in the fight to liberate Europe from the Nazis.”

“The movie depicts the realism of war by showing the bravery, fear, cowardice and horror of it all,” added Mark C. Hemmrich, a Legionnaire from Stevens Point, Wis. “It exemplifies our American ingenuity, honor and our sense of liberty, justice, religion and family.”

To Hell and Back

This 1955 classic is unique because of the autobiographical nature of it. The star, Medal of Honor recipient Audie Murphy, played himself. Murphy, the most decorated soldier of World War II, was nearly rejected for enlistment because of his small stature. He more than proves his worth while fighting in the European theater. “To Hell and Back” re-creates the actions which led to Murphy’s Medal of Honor in a memorable fight against the Germans.

“This film, Audie Murphy’s story, left out all the usual clichés found in war movies and stayed away from the typical propaganda connected with this type of film,” wrote V.R. Vincent, of Conrad, Mont. “It told the simple story of one ordinary American soldier serving his country and being recognized for what he was, an outstanding hero and patriot.”

The Longest Day

Another D-Day film, this 1962 movie featured an ensemble cast including John Wayne, Henry Fonda, Robert Mitchum, Sean Connery and Richard Burton. One notable person who lost out on a role, however, was former President Eisenhower. While Ike indicated a willingness to portray himself, make-up artists did not believe they could make the former two-term president resemble the younger version of himself. Even back then the Oval Office had a way of aging its occupants.

In one of the film’s more memorable lines, Brig. Gen. Norman Cota spells out his expectations of his men. “I don”t have to tell you the story. You all know it. Only two kinds of people are gonna stay on this beach: those that are already dead and those that are gonna die. Now get off your butts. You guys are the Fighting 29th.”

Band of Brothers

When a 10-part miniseries places near the top in a “best movie” survey, you know it has to be good. This 2001 HBO production reunites Private Ryan alumni Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks, who produced this World War II epic, along with the late Stephen Ambrose. Dale Dye once again provided his military expertise.

“Band of Brothers is a war movie about comradeship at its best,” wrote Joe Langenbach, of Allentown, Penn. “We watch these paratroopers of Easy Company from their training in Georgia than overseas to England to D-Day to V-E Day…We see the mental strain and in a few cases, breakdown of some men. All one has to do is watch this HBO movie to know that this is the way it was, without the Hollywood hype.”

Battleground

A winner of two Academy Awards, this film portrays a platoon from the 101stAirborne Division at the Battle of the Bulge. It stars Van Johnson and Ricardo Montalban, of future “Fantasy Island” fame. A 1949 MGM production, this film is a tale of survival against German spies wearing U.S. Army uniforms, relentless artillery, bitter winter weather, dwindling supplies and a fierce enemy. Made just five years after the real Battle of the Bulge, producers were able to find plenty of veterans to supply every detail in this black-and-white classic.

“I was an infantry PFC during this battle and think the movie was an excellent representation of the way things were – the only lack of authenticity was, of course, the lack of profanity,” wrote William G. Howe, of Schenectady, N.Y.

A Walk in the Sun

This 1945 World War II film set in Italy does not rely on combat action but instead on the perspectives and observations of the infantrymen who reveal their true characters while contemplating their mission, which is to capture an enemy-held farmhouse. Dana Andrews plays platoon squad leader Sgt. Tyne, who assumed command after his superiors were killed. Burgess Meredith supplies effective narration.

“It is an uncomplicated and low-tech story of a group of Americans doing a job. The scene that I remember most was the Lloyd Bridges’ character commenting, as a farmer, on the poor quality of the Italian soil – what a metaphor,” wrote Roger Stryeski, of Roselle, N.J.

We Were Soldiers

The only non-World War II film to finish in the top 10, this 2002 movie is also the most recent. Mel Gibson stars as Lt. Col Hal Moore who leads the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry into Ia Drang Valley, the first major U.S. ground battle in the Vietnam War. Based on the book “We Were Soldiers Once…and Young” by Moore and Joseph L. Galloway, Sam Elliott steels the show as Sgt. Major Basil Plumley. When a soldier innocently comments on the “beautiful morning” to the sergeant major, he is bluntly asked, “What are you a (expletive) weatherman now?”

“Most movies about Vietnam were garbage that made it look like U.S. soldiers (were) the bad guys,” wrote Samuel D. High, of Lonoke, Ark. “This movie was based on real soldiers in a real battle and it showed the honor and courage the vast majority of us had who served in Vietnam. I appreciate Mel Gibson doing this movie and the veterans who served in this battle who made sure it was done right.”

Sands of Iwo Jima

John Wayne stars as Marine Sgt. John Stryker in this 1949 film that earned the Duke his first Academy Award nomination. Real-life Mt. Suribachi flag-raisers Rene Gagnon, Ira Hayes and John Bradley also appear in the film. According to Wikipedia, the film has the first recorded use of the phrase, “lock and load.”

Two voters credit the movie for “saving the Marine Corps,” at a time when leaders in Washington were questioning the need for the service.

Twelve O’Clock High

Screenwriters Sy Barlett and Bernie Lay Jr. drew on their own World War II experiences with the Eighth Air Force Bomber units in this 1949 film starring Gregory Peck. Twelve O’Clock High includes actual combat footage, with other portions of the film shot at Eglin Air Force Base.

Peck doesn’t win any friend at first as the heard-nosed Brig. Gen. Frank Savage but the men eventually see the value of his approach. Savage is believed to be a composite of Gen. Curtis LeMay, Brig. Gen. Frank Castle and Col John K. Gerhart.

The film is often viewed at leadership seminars and in the U.S. Service Academies. It was cited in The New York Times as one of the 1,000 best films ever.

The Story of GI Joe

World War II was still underway when this film was released in 1945. Sadly, war correspondent Ernie Pyle was killed in the fighting on Okinawa without ever having seen the film that was based on his experiences and newspaper dispatches from North Africa and Italy.

Burgess Meredith and Robert Mitchum star in this no-holds barred portrayal of the infantry, complete with mud, blood and death. Guadalcanal and Tarawa veteran Charles Wysocki, of Green Valley, Ariz., writes “It is the most realistic war movie I have ever seen…It tells the story our GIs in combat and I know about combat…GI Joe is real!”

Sold on The American Legion

With decades of experience in military recruiting and sales, National Commander Marty Conatser is eager to grow the nation’s largest veterans organization.

BY MATT GRILLS

Martin “Marty” Conatser is a membership guy, plain and simple.
He’ll tell you that. His friends and family will tell you that. Illinois Legionnaires – numbering nearly 129,000 thanks largely to Conatser’s efforts as the department’s first membership director – will tell you that. He’s a salesman by trade, and as national commander of The American Legion, he sees the organization as a valuable product to sell, a great deal for veterans and their families.
“We have tremendous people who give of themselves so freely, of their time and of their energy and of their money,” says Conatser, who was elected at the 89th National Convention in August. “But we often don’t tell them that they’re part of a big program. Who’s fighting right now to get soldiers the equipment and medical gear they need, and to improve the GI Bill? How many Vietnam War veterans realize that the Legion filed the suit on Agent Orange? Those are the types of things The American Legion does routinely, and we don’t tell anybody.
“Membership and membership recruiting is about helping veterans understand what the Legion is about and how easy it is to be part of our organization, which does so much good.”
Having spent most of his life in the high-pressure world of sales, Conatser knows how to make a pitch. For 21 years, as operations sergeant major for recruiting, he enlisted young men and women in the Illinois Army National Guard – “selling the military experience,” he calls it. After retiring in 1996, he went to work for The American Legion Department of Illinois, where Conatser created his dream job: membership director. In the position, he developed training programs and recruiting awards for all levels of leadership while pushing Illinois to 100 percent.
In 2002, Conatser began seriously considering a run for national commander. Recognizing he’d need a job with flexible hours and extended time off for travel – his candidacy has taken him to all 55 Legion departments and even to Iraq to visit with U.S. troops – Conatser joined Worden-Martin Auto Group in Champaign as a salesman.
“We all knew what we had right away,” says Wayne Weber, dealership president. “We decided early on we would allow him all the time off he needs to serve as national commander, because he’s so industrious anyway. When he’s here, it’s like double time for anyone else. You never have to worry about what he’s thinking or doing, because he’s always moving the ball down the field.”

Courtship and Courtside. Conatser and his wife, Sharon, own a house just minutes from the University of Illinois campus, where she works as an administrative assistant in the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences. They decided together that Marty should pursue the Legion’s highest office, and his campaign was a family affair. Sharon’s father, Clayborn Lofton, chaired the campaign committee, and her mother, Irene, served as co-treasurer. Clayborn is an Illinois past department commander, and Irene is a past president of the Illinois Auxiliary.
“They think I’m the best thing that ever happened to Sharon,” Conatser jokes. The couple met through her parents in 1989, on a bus trip to the 71st National Convention in Baltimore. Both Sharon and Marty were divorced at the time, and both were already heavily involved in American Legion activities. They fell in love and married the next year. Between them, they have three sons, Richard, Rick and Bryan, and three grandchildren.
The American Legion is every bit as important to Sharon as it is her husband; she grew up attending meetings and conventions, and, like her mother, she served as Auxiliary department president. “Sometimes people think only one of you can be active in an organization, which frustrates the heck out of us,” Sharon says. “We both believe in The American Legion, as a family, and we wouldn’t be as active as we are if we didn’t believe the other one had a place to serve.”
The only activity rivaling the Legion for the Conatsers’ affections is University of Illinois sports. A magnet on their refrigerator identifies the Fighting Illini season-ticket holders as diehard fans; down the hall an entire room is stuffed with memorabilia celebrating their favorite football and basketball teams, including Chief Illiniwek statues and plates, panoramic photos from memorable games, orange-and blue pillow shams and Christmas ornaments. A light bulb hanging from the ceiling shines inside an orange football helmet. Outside, orange flowers form an “I.”
During basketball season, Conatser tunes in even when the Illini aren’t playing. “I don’t even have to know the teams,” he says. “I just enjoy watching.”

Hometown Boy. Driving through his hometown of Deland, about 20 miles west of Champaign, Conatser describes an upbringing that’s as American as apple pie. With a population of about 450, the town has never really grown and never really shrunk, because it’s a good place to live, he says. “It’s what everybody wants, a place they can remember that hasn’t changed a lot, that’s still friendly.”
Conatser’s father worked as a farmer and carpenter, and his mother raised their five children while balancing occasional jobs. As a boy, he loved baseball, and in high school he played football for two years before taking a job making resistor coils.
After graduation, Conatser worked on a local family’s farm while taking college classes. When the family sold their land, he decided to sign up for the active-duty Army National Guard program, and in 1971 he attended basic and advanced infantry training at Fort Polk, La. He ended up loving the military, particularly the challenge of recruiting, and figured since he was happy with it he might as well make the Guard his career.
About the same time, Conatser began to get involved at American Legion Lincoln Post 102 in Deland. He’d been a member for years, but when he attended a post meeting to seek support for the local Little League, he got a whole lot more than new uniforms. “When I left that night, I was the post commander,” he says.
Again, Conatser had stumbled upon an unintentional career course, this one in The American Legion. Since 1982, he’s leapfrogged from one Legion leadership position to another, including district, division and department commander. Nationally, he has served on the Veterans Planning and Coordinating Committee, and as chairman of the Membership & Post Activities Committee, as well as the Legislative Commission.
Along the way, Conatser has taken time to mentor and encourage younger Legionnaires. One of them is Chuck Zelinsky, a member of the National Public Relations Commission and past department historian for Illinois.
“When Marty was elected state commander, I was on the stage to hear his speech, and right then I knew I had more to give to the Legion, and I wanted to,” he says. “Since then, I’ve become active in the organization. He’s been my installing officer twice, when I was post commander and when I was county commander. He inspires me, so I look forward to his leadership this year as national commander.”

Good Old Days. Ever the optimist, Conatser isn’t one to lament for yesterday’s American Legion. He’d rather talk about the bright future he sees ahead. “We’ll always like to reminisce about
what was,” he says. “Well, I’m making my good old days today.”
As for young Legionnaires and increasing their involvement,  Conatser can only remember what it was like for himself, for many years a member but not all that active until later years.
“Many of us have forgotten that at 25 or 30 we didn’t have much extra money or time,” he says. “We were trying to raise our families. When we get that young veteran, we need to realize that he’s not going to be down at the post one night a week doing the work of The American Legion right now. We need to try to get him or her to come help us on one program a year and keep his membership up. There will come a time when he can be more active in the organization.”
Some posts are already trying a more family-oriented outreach, with youth soccer, child care and Scout sponsorship acting as magnets.
“Instead of talking about what your membership does for you and for your fellow veteran, we’re saying, ‘Oh no, it costs $4.50 more,’” he says, shaking his head. “That’s not a six-pack of pop. It just doesn’t mean anything. All the time I talk to people who say they don’t know if they get anything out of it. And I ask them, ‘Would you give $25 a year to an organization dedicated to helping children and veterans?’ Most of them say yeah, they’d donate $25. That’s your dues, folks. If you never step foot in an American Legion post, that’s your dues.
“We’re spending too much time on the cost of membership when we should be talking about the value of membership. We should be selling the fact that what we do is the right thing for America. We’re selling the good things we do for other veterans and their families. People stood up and protected our benefits without us even knowing it, and now we’re doing the same for the next generation of veterans. We have to let them know that’s what we’re doing. That’s when we’ll succeed.”

Matt Grills is an associate editor at The American L­­­­egion Magazine.

 

Top Ten Things You Don’t Know About Marty Conatser

His 26-year military career wasn’t planned; he just enjoyed recruiting for the Illinois Army National Guard. Then one day he woke up and realized he’d put in 12 years. “At that point I figured I could do the next eight standing on my head,” he says.

His wife, Sharon, feared he’d get them killed at a 1998 college basketball game – specifically, Indiana University vs. University of Illinois at Assembly Hall in Bloomington, Ind. Moments before IU Coach Bob Knight was ejected for berating referee Ted Valentine, Conatser – wearing blue and orange, and sitting as a guest in the heavy-donor section – stood up and yelled, “Throw the jerk out!”

He’s not a coffee drinker. His preferred morning beverage is Diet Pepsi.

Every year, he and a close friend – Illinois Department Commander Myron Kirby – take the longest and most circuitous route they can find to the Legion’s national convention. Along the way, they drop in on local posts.

He’s a Chicago White Sox fan, because the team offers free admission to members of the U.S. military.

His favorite food is Italian. His least favorite? Chinese.

Twice a year, he travels north to Wisconsin to go snowmobiling. In 1977, a friend invited him, and he got hooked. “I don’t give it up for anybody,” he says.

He’s a cancer survivor. Years ago, driving back from visiting his cancer-stricken brother in New Orleans, Conatser got a call confirming he too had it. He’s now cancer-free, and  he considers it the most difficult challenge he’s ever faced.

He and Sharon are tailgating fanatics, and their University of Illinois football parties are legendary. For 11 o’clock games, they fix breakfast before and eat lunch afterward. For 1 o’clock games, it’s lunch before and a snack later. Anywhere from six to 60 people show up.

He and his younger brother, Wayne, used to drag race. As the “C&C Boys,” they drove several cars, including a ’67 red and white Camaro, while competing on the Midwest circuit. They even got a mention in Hot Rod magazine.

BY JAMES JAY CARAFANO

In June, Washington fought and lost its own Little Big Horn. Attempting to push through comprehensive legislation to secure America’s broken borders and fix dysfunctional immigration laws, Congress – like Custer – fought at the wrong place at the wrong time. The politicians fought outnumbered, garnering withering criticisms from the right and the left. They deserved to lose.

Washington lost because the draft bill proposed in the Senate would have made the challenge of securing the U.S.-Mexican border more, not less, difficult. The legislation would have encouraged more illegal migration. It would have saddled federal, state and local governments with crippling financial burdens and cheapened the value of U.S. citizenship.

Making compromises at every turn, the legislation lost sight of the nature of the problem, and what border and immigration reforms are needed to keep the United States free, safe and prosperous.

Know Your Enemy. Fixing a problem starts with understanding the problem. More than 500,000?people illegally cross the southern border a year, and millions more live unlawfully inside the United States. These troubles, however, are mere symptoms of the two real issues.

No. 1. The United States shares about 2,000 miles of border with Mexico. That border is an economic engine that generates hundreds of billions a year in benefits for both countries. It is, however, a border out of control?– and that creates a serious security problem. Transnational criminals are exploiting the chaos, and cartels are fighting over control of a corridor that ferries a multibillion-dollar-a-year business of drugs, people and weapons. There is nothing going on in Baghdad that has not been tried on the border: kidnapping, bombings, beheadings. The cartel wars and violence and lawlessness they breed are making U.S. borders a dangerous place, destroying property and putting lives at risk. Going after the gangs has to be a top priority. Dealing with illegal immigration is part of the mix. Serious criminals hide among the 500,000 individuals who illegally cross the border each year. A significant drop in illegal crossings would allow law enforcement to focus resources on criminals victimizing people on both sides of the border.

No. 2. By even the most conservative estimates, the United States has an unlawful population of at least 12 million. This population serves as a magnet for further illegal migration. According to a Pew Hispanic Center study in 2003, individuals working in the United States sent almost $30 billion to their families in Latin America and the Caribbean. As the single largest form of direct foreign investment in the region, these remittances have become the economic engine of Latin America. As long as the unprecedented economic importance of remittances remains, individuals will seek access to the U.S. labor market by legal or illegal means. That pressure has overwhelmed America’s ability to secure its own border.

The challenges of an unlawful population that accounts for about 4 to 5 percent of everyone living in America – or about one in every 25 people in the country – also reach well beyond the border. They are largely the source of undocumented workers referred to as cheap labor. In truth, the costs of low-wage, undocumented labor is foisted on state and local communities, from providing various entitlements to the law-enforcement expenses involved in incarcerating criminal aliens. As a result, while immigration overall has a net-positive effect on the U.S. economy, the fiscal costs of illegal migration often fall disproportionately on small communities. Up to 3 million people who illegally crossed the border, for example, are living in Texas. That’s about 20?percent of the unlawfully present population in the United States, and the public benefits they receive?– like education and emergency-room care – are a crippling burden.

There are other issues as well, like public health. Recently, the case of Andrew Speaker, the globetrotting honeymooning lawyer infected with tuberculosis, gained the attention of thousands of newspaper articles and hours of TV coverage because of his ability to slip past border officials. What the media largely missed is that the United States already has a major communicable disease problem. And the individuals entering the United States legally through legitimate points of entry are the least part of it. Tuberculosis, including strains that are increasingly drug-resistant, is one of the fastest-spreading diseases in the world. In part, this is because of the spread of HIV/AIDS, which reduces the human immune system and leaves individuals more susceptible to TB. According the World Health Organization, more than 8 million people a year get TB, and about 98 percent live in the developing world. Most illegal migration comes from the developing world to Europe and the United States. Many of these individuals never pass through a point of entry, which is the most likely source of a human-carried pandemic.

When the Senate considered a bill that would immediately grant legal status, including the right to pass back and forth across the U.S. border, to anyone living unlawfully in the United States – with no health check required – everyone should have been concerned.

Missing in Action. As far as solving America’s border and immigration woes, logic was largely missing from the legislation proposed in the Senate that started out by granting amnesty to virtually anyone. For starters, this seriously flawed proposal would have undermined the rule of law by granting massive benefits to those who have willfully violated U.S. laws while denying benefits to those who have played by the rules, and sometimes even to U.S. citizens.

The Senate’s immigration reform proposal would not improve border security and could actually worsen the problem of illegal immigration. The most dramatic impact of the legislation would be to allow millions of immigrants who are unlawfully present in the United States to remain, critically undermining the deterrent effect of U.S. immigration laws and border security. As recent experience in both the United States and Europe demonstrates, legalization measures only spur further unlawful migration.

Like the Senate legislation, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was a bipartisan compromise strongly supported by the president. When President Reagan signed the bill, he declared, “It will remove the incentive for illegal immigration.” More than 2 million signed up for amnesty in 1986; the unlawful population in the United States today is probably five times that.

Proponents of the Senate bill and the Congressional Budget Office largely dismissed the expense of amnesty by issuing a standard 10 year outlook for quantifying the costs and benefits. Many of the most profound costs associated with the bill occur after the point when amnesty recipients get full citizenship. Then the check comes due. Robert Rector, an analyst at the Heritage Foundation, who looked at the “out year” costs of amnesty, found that it would greatly increase long-term costs to taxpayers. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a reliable estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the United States were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government – benefits minus taxes – could exceed $2.6 trillion.

No one knows the true number of those here who would sign up for amnesty. The response to the 1986 amnesty proved far greater than expected. In addition, since the standards for amnesty qualification could be easily falsified, there a significant number of fraudulent applications might be expected. Finally, Medicare and Medicaid rates could rise far faster than current CBO projections. That means that a system growing so fast that it is already on course to bankrupt the federal budget could happen just that much faster.

Stop the Insanity. The United States has been ramping up security on the border for decades. Spending has tripled and has had almost no impact on stemming the flow of illegal crossings. Also, only about half of those living unlawfully in the United States crossed an open border. The other half entered legally and overstayed their visas. Only securing the border would be like locking the door but leaving the window open.

There is, however, a sensible strategy that would work, based on four basic points.

1. Enforce the laws. Numerous laws already exist that, if enforced in a targeted manner, would discourage illegal immigration and the employment of illegal labor and send a signal that such activities will no longer be overlooked. Recent actions by the administration prove that reasonable enforcement measures – well short of massive deportations – can significantly reduce the number of illegal border crossings.

2. Regain control of the southern border. Many of the border-security provisions of the Senate proposal are being implemented as requirements of previous legislation, including the Secure Fences Act of 2006 and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. This should continue. Responsible border security and workplace enforcement makes America safer.

3. Emphasize legal immigration. The process by which individuals enter the country legally must be fair, orderly and efficient – welcoming those who abide by immigration laws and denying entry and advantages to those who violate the law. The integrity of this process is important to protecting and encouraging a meaningful naturalization and citizenship process.

4. Create flexible legal opportunities to work in the United States. A balanced and well-constructed temporary worker program that allows for a market-driven source of labor provided by a rotating temporary workforce would diminish incentives for illegal immigration by providing an additional option for legal entry. This would foster national security and serve a growing economy.

Together, these elements – along with a rejection of amnesty – offer a real possibility for strengthening national security and replacing an undocumented labor force with temporary workers and new legal immigrants. Additional options may become reasonable once these policies are allowed to operate over time.

This strategy is realistic and feasible in the short term. Most of the tools required to beef up border security and pursue workplace enforcement already have been passed and mostly authorized by Congress. The only missing programmatic component is a practical and realistic alternative for legal temporary workers.

Without serious policy change, the illegal population in the United States will continue to grow, the burden on local communities will increase, the stresses on civil society will become greater, and border security will become more expensive while remaining just as ineffective. On the other hand, with a handful of initiatives, Congress and an administration working to implement existing and new national security and immigration laws could achieve a comprehensive solution in a reasonable amount of time. A far brighter future would unfold.

As with any major policy goal, reducing illegal entry and presence in the United States will take time and perseverance. Likewise, it is misleading and naïve to suggest that every policy aspect can and should be settled up front in one all-encompassing agreement. The challenge is to answer the big questions first so that the others fall into place or are susceptible to later resolution. This approach to immigration is analogous to the policy success of welfare reform in the 1990s. The use of incentives and disincentives to encourage work reduced welfare rolls over time by 60 percent, through the decreased entry and increased exit of welfare-program participants.

Securing a future where America’s borders are no longer porous, its laws are respected, and illegal labor is replaced by legal workers and legal immigrants is an achievable objective. The way forward is not to repeat the failures of the past but to pursue an incremental strategy of real reforms. With these steps, the president and Congress can deliver on their promises to provide border security and to realize comprehensive immigration reform. This achievement would help lawmakers to not only regain the trust and confidence of the American people, but also to meet their solemn obligations to keep the nation safe, prosperous and?free for all Americans – and all those who will become Americans – today and for generations to come.

James Carafano, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, is an expert in defense affairs, military operations and strategy, and homeland security at The Heritage Foundation. A former assistant professor at the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, he has authored many books and studies.

National Commander Marty Conatser urged Congress to enact the legislative proposals of The American Legion during testimony before a joint session of the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees on Sept. 20. The following is the text of his testimony:

Chairman Akaka, Chairman Filner, and Members of the Committees, it is an honor for me to appear before this distinguished body to present The American Legion’s legislative priorities, as they affect the delivery of healthcare and benefits through the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Congressman Johnson, thank you for introducing me today.  And thank you for your selfless dedication to doing what’s right for America.  I look forward to working with you during my term as National Commander. 

With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to recognize a few outstanding leaders and veterans’ advocates in the audience today.  First, please allow me to introduce my National Vice Commanders:

National Vice Commander Thomas L. Burns, Jr.  --  (Delaware)
National Vice Commander Peggy G. Dettori  --  (Alaska)
National Vice Commander Randall A. Fisher  --  (Kentucky)
National Vice Commander Donald Hayden  --  (Minnesota)
National Vice Commander David A. Korth  --  (Wisconsin)

Also with us today are a number of past National Commanders of The American Legion.  I would ask that they stand now and be recognized.

It is my pleasure now to introduce the President of the nation’s largest patriotic women’s organization, The American Legion Auxiliary, Mrs. Jan Pulvermacher-Ryan (Wisconsin). 

With President Pulvermacher-Ryan are a number of Past National Auxiliary Presidents, and I would ask that they stand and be recognized. 

I would also like to recognize the Commander of the Sons of The American Legion, Raymond Geihll, (Geel) Jr. (Indiana).

I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the one person who has been the key to my success in this organization and in life.  The road to becoming National Commander is paved with sacrifices, and this wonderful woman has sacrificed quite a bit in her support of my service with The American Legion.  I would not be here today without her help – my lovely wife, Sharon.

Chairmen and Members of the Committees, The American Legion has a proud tradition of advocating on behalf of America’s veterans, and this testimony reaffirms our commitment to ensuring all eligible veterans of this country receive the benefits and healthcare that they have earned through their service.  I would like to personally thank both of the chairmen for listening to the voice of America’s veterans and re-instating these important joint hearings.  

Providing the Legislative Priorities of our organization before a joint session is an extremely valuable opportunity, and I am proud to be representing The American Legion here today.

Each generation of America’s veterans has earned the right to quality health care, disability compensation, rehabilitation and transitional programs available through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  With this in mind, I applaud the actions of the 110th Congress for finishing the FY 2007 VA budget with an increase.  Also, FY 2008 funding allocations for many VA accounts meet or exceed funding targets proposed by The American Legion in testimony presented earlier this year.  The American Legion commends these actions.  Congress has not exceeded the funding targets of The American Legion in many years. 

The American Legion will continue to work with both Committees to ensure that VA is capable of providing  “care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan.” 

As a nation at war, and as stewards of the trust of America’s service members and veterans, it is our obligation to work together to provide a system of healthcare and benefits that will serve to truly assist transitioning service members, as well as those who have served in the past and are now turning to VA for help. 

The conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center exposed a terrible gap between the appearance and the reality of a seamless transition for our severely injured service members.  While the physical conditions at Walter Reed were not the fault of VA, deficiencies in the entire transition process were exposed. 

Besides the horrible living conditions that were brought to light at Walter Reed, the most often heard complaint from service members concerned confusion over the transition process itself. 

Often it was the transition process that delayed the receiving of quality VA health care and other earned benefits for our newest generation of wartime veterans. 
All have agreed that this is a failure on the part of The Department of Defense and VA.

After four short months, the “President’s Commission On Care for America’s Returning Wounded Warriors” has made six recommendations to assure a seamless transition for the severely wounded.  The American Legion is aware that these recommendations are being put into legislative form.  Some of these reforms have already been suggested by Members of Congress.  

We commend the Commission’s efforts to embrace a “patient-centered” approach that also recognizes the needs of family members.

The American Legion strongly urges the enactment of reforms that will simplify the transition process not only for the severely injured, but also for any service member facing medical discharge – whether in time of war or peace. 

However, The American Legion has serious concerns that the recommended changes to the VA disability system will create two separate compensation programs.  Creating a completely different compensation program will only add to the complexity of an already overburdened system. 

The American Legion is also concerned that the new earning loss payment proposed by the Commission will be subject to FICA tax and will also cease once a veteran begins receiving Social Security.  This recommendation fails to recognize that the benefit is not merely to compensate for economic impairment, but is also the thanks of a grateful nation in recognition of the sacrifices of our service disabled veterans.  To tax it and eventually replace it with Social Security is simply not acceptable.  Congress must be careful that in its attempts to fix perceived problems they do not, in fact, create additional problems.  Creating more layers of bureaucracy will only cause more frustration to service members and veterans.  Any real solution must reduce paperwork, increase cooperation between DoD and VA, and consider the impact on service members, veterans and their entire families.

As we bring home a new generation of veterans, VA must be capable of striking that balance between meeting their needs and the needs of past veterans already in and just beginning to access the system.  By working together, we can provide a strong VA for all veterans – Past, Present and Future.

The American Legion stands ready to work with you to accomplish this goal.

Another area of concern for The American Legion is the current prohibition on enrollment of new Priority Group 8 veterans.  Denying any veteran his or her earned benefit is a broken promise of a grateful nation.

FY 2007 saw the continuation of the suspension of enrollment of new Priority Group 8 veterans due solely to limited resources. 

Simply denying earned benefits does not solve the problems resulting from an inadequate federal budget.

As the Global War on Terrorism continues, fiscal resources for VA will continue to be stretched.  A viable VA is one that cares for all veterans, not just the most severely wounded among us  or recently separated veterans. 

The American Legion recommends $38.4 billion in discretionary funding for veterans’ healthcare in Fiscal Year 2009.

In an effort to provide a stable and adequate funding process, The American Legion fully supports Assured Funding for veterans’ health care. 

The current discretionary funding process leaves VA facility administrators unable to establish a clear plan for the future because of the continuous mismatch between patient demands and uncertain funding. 

Assured funding for VA medical care would provide more realistic appropriations based on the actual patients’ population like Medicare, Social Security, and VA compensation and pension.

The American Legion believes health care rationing for veterans must end. It is time to guarantee health care funding for all enrolled VA patients.

In addition, The American Legion believes that Congress should allow VA to bill, collect and retain third-party reimbursements from Medicare on behalf of Medicare-eligible veterans.

Nearly all veterans pay into Medicare for their entire working lives.  However, when they are most likely to need medical services from the one hospital system designed specifically for them, they must turn elsewhere because VA cannot bill Medicare.  This is wrong, and I urge you to correct this injustice.

The American Legion firmly believes that making VA a Medicare provider and designating VA medical care as a Mandatory Funding item within the Federal budget will enable VA to fulfill its health care delivery mission.

Another area of concern is VA’s Long-Term Care. This has been the subject of discussion and legislation for nearly two decades.

VA has yet to develop a long-term care strategic plan with well-articulated policies that address the issues of access and integrated planning for the long-term care of mentally ill veterans. 

The American Legion supports the publishing and implementation of a Long Term Care strategic plan that addresses the increasing long-term care needs of America’s veterans. 

Additionally, The American Legion will continue to support legislation that will ensure appropriate payments for the cost of Long-Term Care provided to veterans in State Veterans’ Homes; stronger oversight of payments to State Veterans’ Homes; full reimbursement for the treatment of veterans 70 percent service-connected or higher; and the more efficient delivery of pharmaceuticals.

The American Legion urges Congress to support adequate funding for VA to meet the long-term care needs of America’s veterans.

In 2002, The American Legion visited 60 VA Medical Centers nationwide and compiled a report highlighting the issues affecting VA as a result of years of inadequate funding.  This initial report, titled “A System Worth Saving,” covered issues from Medical Care Collection Fund targets, to timely access standard, to budgetary shortfalls, to staffing shortages.  This comprehensive report was presented to Congress and shared with VA in an attempt to bring attention to the budgetary needs of the VA health care system.

This year marks the printing of the fifth “A System Worth Saving” report. 

The American Legion’s 2007 “System Worth Saving” report focuses on the services provided through VA Vet Centers, Polytrauma  Rehabilitation Centers and  Polytrauma Network sites.

The American Legion visited Vet Centers that were located near demobilization sites, select Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers and Polytrauma network sites to ascertain the effects of the number of returning veterans on the services provided.  47 Vet Centers, 4 Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers and 16 Polytrauma Network Sites were visited.  Each report has highlighted key issues in determining quality care:  staffing levels, funding, physical plant, and obstacles and challenges to providing care.

I encourage you to review this valuable publication at your convenience. 

The American Legion believes that all Vet Centers need to be fully staffed with qualified providers to ensure that combat veterans seeking care for readjustment are afforded the same standard of quality care, no matter which Vet Center they use.

We are all aware of the July 2006 report entitled “Health Status of and Services for OEF and OIF Veterans after Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation,” in which the VA’s Office of Inspector General examined VA’s ability to meet the needs of veterans who suffered from traumatic brain injury (TBI). 

Some 52 patients from around the country were interviewed at least one year after completing inpatient rehabilitation from a Polytrauma Rehabilitation Center that included those who lived in a state with a rural veterans’ population. 

Some of the challenges noted by family members who care for these veterans in rural settings include the necessity for complicated special arrangements and the absence of VA rehabilitative care in their communities. 

Case managers working at Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers and several Polytrauma Network Sites centers noted limited ability to follow patients after discharge to rural areas, and the lack of adequate transportation.

These limitations place undue hardship on the veterans’ families as well.  Veterans have shared many examples of families devastated by the demands of caring for TBI injured veterans.  They have sacrificed financially, have lost jobs that provided the sole income for the family, and have endured extended separations from children. 

It is important that the veterans turning to VA for care of Traumatic Brain Injury receive the highest level of treatment and rehabilitation available.  

Initially, VA designated four Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers and recently announced the creation of a fifth Polytrauma Rehabilitation Center in San Antonio. 

These state of the art facilities provide specialized rehabilitation to help severely-injured patients optimize the level of independence and functionality they are capable of achieving.  Another unique aspect of the Polytrauma Rehabilitation Center is that those needing care for traumatic brain injury, amputations, blindness and mental health issues can receive that care in one location.

During the “System Worth Saving” site visits to the Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers, many had vacancies for highly specialized rehabilitative fields and nursing.  The biggest challenge to filling the vacancies was the inability to offer competitive salaries. 

VA must be adequately staffed in order to maintain or enhance services provided to veterans and service members who are recovering from multiple injuries. 

Research conducted by VA has indicated that veterans residing in rural areas are in poorer health than their urban counterparts.  Providing quality health care in a rural setting has proven to be very challenging, due to limited availability of skilled care providers and inadequate access to care.

Even more challenging will be VA’s ability to provide treatment and rehabilitation to rural veterans who suffer from the signature ailments of the on-going Global War on Terror, such as traumatic blast injuries, and combat-related mental health conditions.  VA’s efforts need to be especially focused on these issues.

The Veterans Integrated Services Networks rely heavily upon VA’s Community Based Outpatient Clinics, or C-BOCs, to close the gap in rural care.

Many of the C-BOCs are at or near capacity, and many still do not provide adequate mental health services to veterans in need. 

Providing mental health services in C-BOCs is even more critical today than ever before with the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  It has been estimated that nearly 30 percent of the veterans who are returning from combat suffer from some type of mental stress.  Further, statistics show that mental health is one of the top three reasons a returning veteran seeks VA health care.

The American Legion believes that all veterans, regardless of where they live, should have access to VA health care.

Providing contracted care in highly rural communities--when VA health care services are NOT possible--would alleviate the unwarranted hardships that these veterans encounter when seeking access to VA health care.

Chairmen, The American Legion remains committed to ensuring that VA carries out its historic and statutory responsibility to also provide other benefits to veterans.

VA reported that its Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) regional offices issued more than 774,000 disability determinations in FY 2006. 

This represents an increase of about 11,000 decisions from the previous fiscal year.   VA received 806,000 rating claims in FY 2006 and this number will undoubtedly increase in FY 2007. 

According to VBA, as of August 25, 2007, there were 400,000 rating claims pending, 25 percent of which were pending more than 180 days.

According to the Government Accountability Office, although VA made progress earlier this decade in reducing the size and age of its pending claims backlog, it is currently losing ground due, in part, to increased filing of claims, including those filed by OIF and OEF veterans. 

Inadequate staffing levels, and increased pressure to make quick decisions, which results in an overall decrease in the quality of work, has been a consistent complaint among service center employees interviewed by our staff during our regional office quality checks. 

In order to ensure VA and VBA are meeting their responsibilities, The American Legion strongly urges Congress to scrutinize VBA’s budget request to ensure that it reflects the needed increase in full-time employees to address the ever-increasing and unmanageable backlog. 

The American Legion strongly supports additional staffing. Our current wartime situation provides an excellent opportunity for VA to actively seek out returning veterans from OEF and OIF, especially those with service-connected disabilities, for employment opportunities within VBA. 

Over the past few years, The American Legion’s Quality Review Team has visited more than 40 VBA regional offices for the purpose of assessing overall operations. 

The American Legion site visits reveal too few experienced supervisors to provide trainee adjudicators proper mentoring and quality assurance. 

In addition, at many stations, ongoing training for staff is postponed or suspended, in order to focus maximum effort on production. 

Despite the assurances of the Under Secretary for Benefits that training is a top priority within VBA, the inconsistency in VBA’s training approach needs to be thoroughly reviewed and addressed. 

Each of VBA’s 57 regional offices appears to have different approaches to training and they also differ in the importance they place on training. 

A national training standard, in addition to the centralized training conducted by Compensation and Pension Service for regional office personnel, is also needed. 

The emphasis on production continues to take priority over training and quality assurance.  Although VBA’s policy of “production first” has resulted in many more veterans getting faster action on their claims, the downside has been that tens of thousands of cases have been prematurely and arbitrarily denied. 

The American Legion strongly recommends a substantial change in VBA’s work measurement system.  A more accurate reliable work measurement system would help to ensure better service to veterans. 

Ultimately, this would require the establishment of a work measurement system that does not allow work credit to be taken until the decision in the claim becomes final.

Another area of concern is the review of VA’s compensation program being conducted by the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC).   We eagerly await the final recommendations of the VDBC after their two-year review of the system.  It is our hope that Congress will thoroughly consider the recommendations of this Commission before any reforms are made.  Including those recommendations by the Dole/Shalala Commission after their four-month study.

The American Legion welcomes recommendations that will improve the delivery of benefits to veterans and their dependents.  However, we will adamantly oppose any recommendation that will take away or restrict current benefits or is otherwise unfair to veterans.

In addition to improved delivery of health care, veterans must be provided effective programs to ease transition from the military.  A strong educational package is vital to improving the lives of veterans after discharge. 

Today’s GI Bill falls short of meeting the actual cost of education in America.  Today’s service members deserve a GI Bill that will allow them to attend college without paying into the system and without the threat of losing their benefit after 10 years.

Congress must strengthen the current GI Bill to a level comparable to the original Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 and include Guard and Reserve members with Federal Active Duty service commitments. 

Chairmen, while I have highlighted key issues of concern to The American Legion this morning, I urge each of you to review my full testimony that has been submitted for the record.

The American Legion appreciates the strong relationship we have developed with these Committees.  With increasing military commitments worldwide, it is important that we work together to ensure that the services and programs offered through VA are available to the new generation of American service members who are now returning home without compromising VA’s ability to serve the current population of veterans already enrolled. 

You have the power to ensure that their sacrifices are, indeed, recognized, honored, and consecrated by the gratitude of a grateful nation.

The American Legion is fully committed to working with each of you to ensure that America’s veterans receive the entitlements they have earned.

The brave men and women who are serving and have served in our Armed Forces throughout the world deserve no less.  I look forward to working with each of you throughout the next year to improve the lives of all of America’s veterans.

Thank You.

“Be prepared,” may be the motto of the Boy Scouts, but it was certainly put into practice by Post 17 in Stark, N.H. recently.

The post turned into an emergency shelter and food preparation center during a disaster preparedness drill Sept. 14-16.

“To our knowledge, an exercise of this scope and type has not been attempted, much less accomplished, on this scale in the entire Department of New Hampshire to date,” said Post Adjutant William J. Cowie.

The main hall provided shelter for approximately 50 mock disaster victims. The drill also included the feeding and support of more than 80 first responders based at remote locations from across the state. These included members of the N.H. National Guard, the State Forest and Lands Department, American Red Cross, Groveton, N.H. Fire and Rescue and Groveton Ambulance. Also participating were four other American Legion posts from the Granite State, including Post 21 from Concord, 41 in Whitefield, Littleton Post 68 and Groveton Post 17.

Nationally, The American Legion has joined with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in promoting September as the fourth annual National Preparedness Month. The American Legion has recently published a guide, “Disaster Preparedness and Response for American Legion Posts, which is available by calling the national public relations division at (317) 630-1200 or by emailing pr@legion.org.

Photo by Ramona E. Joyce

National Commander Marty Conatser met with Speaker Nancy Pelosi today to personally thank her for restoring the joint hearings with Veterans Affairs committees. Commander Conatser also thanked the speaker for her leadership on the budget resolution and the Department of Veterans Affairs appropriations for FY 2008. In greater detail, they discussed specific areas such as traumatic brain injury, post traumatic stress disorder and seamless transition issues for troops returning to the civilian sector, especially National Guard and Reservists and injured troops. They also discussed the Dole/Shalala Presidential Commission report and the pending Disabilities Commission report due out in October. The two leaders also discussed other items on the Legion's legislative agenda including Capital Assets Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES), and the VA claims backlog and adjudications process.

BAGHDAD — “Getting the next part right” in Iraq is critical to America, and future steps must capitalize on opportunities created by the troop surge, this will project U.S. might and show long-term commitment, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.

During a briefing at the Pentagon with Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gates told reporters that he has worked closely with top military and National Security Council officials to define the United States’ upcoming moves in Iraq.

“It has been my view over the last several months that the next steps in Iraq had to address multiple objectives,” he said. “They would need to maximize the opportunity created by the surge to achieve our long-term goals of an Iraq able to sustain, govern and defend itself, and be an ally in the war on terror.”

Gates voiced confidence in the recommendations Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of Multinational Force Iraq, outlined earlier this week during congressional hearings on the troop surge and U.S. operations in Iraq. He added that he supports President Bush’s decision to consider bringing home an Army combat brigade by Christmas.

“With General Petraeus’ recommendations and the president’s decisions, we are where I have hoped since January we would be in the fall,” he said. Gates added that all of the president’s top military commanders and advisors agree with the recommendations that Petraeus proposed and Bush approved.

In the near-term, the United States should take measures to ensure it’s perceived as winning the war on terror, the secretary said. “(Those steps have) to avoid even the appearance of American failure or defeat in Iraq,” he said.

Gates noted that Islamic extremists were emboldened after they successfully helped defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s. In 1993, only five years after the last Soviet servicemember withdrew from the country, terrorists originating from Afghanistan bombed the World Trade Center in New York City. U.S. failure in Iraq, the secretary said, would hand over an ideological victory to extremists fighting coalition forces today and could encourage future terrorist attacks.

“Should the jihadists be able to claim victory in Iraq over us -- the sole remaining superpower -- it would empower them worldwide far, far more than their victory over the Soviets,” he said.

Gates said the next steps in Iraq should send the message to America’s friends and foes that U.S.United States forces “will remain the most significant power there for the long term, … and that we will remain the dominant force in the region.” This signal plays a dual role by reassuring Iraqis that the intends to continue acting as a “stabilizing force.”

The precise form, troop level and mission of a long-term U.S. security force would be negotiated with Iraqi government leaders, Gates said. But in its role to counter terrorism, guard Iraq’s border, and provide support and training to Iraq’s security forces, the U.S. force’s purpose likely would adhere to the principles outlined by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group headed by James A. Baker and Lee H. Hamilton, he added.

Establishing democracy in Iraq -- a foreign concept to the 4,000-year-old area -- has been slower and more difficult than planners first envisioned, Gates acknowledged.

“Part of that has been due to mistakes we have made. Part is due to Iraqi history and culture,” he said. “The challenges in Iraq remain significant,” he acknowledged. “The bloodshed -- both Iraqi and American -- is a daily source of grief.”

But despite challenges in Iraq, Gates encouraged reconciliation among U.S. lawmakers on America’s mission there.

“Here at home, our next steps would need to create the best possible chance for broad, bipartisan support for a sustainable American policy in Iraq that protects long-term American national interests there and in the region,” he said.

The secretary said that regardless of how U.S. policy is steered, servicemembers’ progress and hard work should be maintained and lauded.

“Whatever we might do (has) to preserve the gains made possible by the service and sacrifices of our men and women in uniform,” he said, “and thus reassure them that their service and sacrifice truly has mattered.”

Photo by Ramona E. Joyce

American Legion National Commander Marty Conatser met with President Bush and Vice President Cheney today at the White House. The president addressed about 850 members of veterans and miitary support organizations. The following is the text of his speech.

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks for coming. Laura and I are honored to welcome you here to the South Lawn. Welcome to the people's house. (Applause.) First, I'd like to thank Katy Benko for singing the national anthem. It's not only a beautiful morning to sing the national anthem, it's a beautiful setting in which to sing the national anthem. Katy's husband, Ryan, is deployed to Iraq. Katy, make sure you email him and tell him how appreciative we are of your service, and tell him how appreciative all of us are of your voice. (Applause.)

Laura and I want to thank the members of our -- my administration for joining us. Mr. Vice President, we're really thrilled you're here. Thank you for coming, sir. (Applause.) Secretary of State Condi Rice is with us today. Madam Secretary, appreciate you being here. (Applause.) Secretary Jim Nicholson of the Veterans Affairs Administration; thanks for coming, Jim. (Applause.)

For you veterans who are here, there is no more solemn obligation by your government to make sure you have all it takes to -- for your health care, and for your support. I feel a very strong obligation, since it was my decision that committed young men and women into combat, to make sure our veterans who are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan get all the help this government can possibly provide. (Applause.)

I appreciate the Secretary of the Army, Pete Geren, for joining us; the Secretary of the Navy, Don Winter; General "Hoss" Cartwright, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and his wife Sandee. By the way, General Cartwright is a Marine. (Applause.) I'm not playing to the crowd or anything. (Laughter.)

I want to welcome members of this crowd who have lost a loved one in this war against terror. Our hearts go out to you. We love you. The best way to honor the sacrifices that your loved one made, as well as the sacrifice you have made, is to accomplish the mission, is to achieve the peace. (Applause.)

Laura and I welcome the families who have got a loved one overseas, whether it be in Iraq or Afghanistan, fighting these extremists and terrorists. The best way to honor your loved one is to make sure that he or she has the full support of the United States government as you accomplish the mission that we have set. (Applause.) By the way, for the loved ones here, I fully understand the best way to sustain a volunteer army is to make sure you're happy -- (laughter) -- is to make sure you've got good housing; to make sure that you've got good health care; to make sure that you understand that we know that you're in this fight along with your husband or wife or son or daughter. And that's exactly how this administration feels. (Applause.)

For the veterans who are here, for those of you who are veterans in Iraq and Afghanistan, thank you for volunteering in the face of danger. (Applause.) And for the people who aren't veterans yet, still remain on active duty, thanks for wearing the uniform of the greatest country on the face of the Earth. We're proud of you. (Applause.)

I want to thank the service organizations and those who have come together to support our families and our troops. I can't tell you how important it is for organizations like the Vets for Freedom or the VFW or the American Legion and other groups to -- Gold Star Mothers, got you, okay, thank you -- Blue Star Mothers, Gold Star Mothers, all the mothers, yes. (Applause.) Every day is Mother's Day as far as your concerned, isn't it? (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Don't forget the dads.

THE PRESIDENT: And the dads, yes. I knew this was going to happen. (Laughter.) Yes, the wives; okay, fine. (Laughter.) Everybody is supporting our troops. I want to thank you for doing it. (Applause.)

It's important people hear from you. It's important people hear your voice. And I want to thank you for organizing. I want to thank you not only for the grassroots support of our families, I want to thank you for going up to Capitol Hill. And here's a message I hope you deliver: The Commander-in-Chief wants to succeed -- (applause) -- and the Commander-in-Chief takes seriously the recommendations of our military commanders. General Petraeus came back to the United States to deliver the recommendations he made to me. Inherent in his recommendations is, one, his belief we're succeeding, his belief we will succeed, and I ask the United States Congress to support the troop levels and the strategies I have embraced. (Applause.)

AUDIENCE: USA! USA! USA!

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. When the history books are finally written about this chapter in the war against extremists and radicals, they will recognize certain truths: one, that we recognize that if we were to retreat from the Middle East the enemy would not be content to remain where they are, but they would follow us here. We recognize that the best way to protect our homeland is to defeat an enemy overseas so we do not have to face them here on the streets of America. And we recognize that liberty is powerful, that liberty will yield the peace that we want for generations to come; that will recognize that this generation of Americans did the hard work now, so that future generations could live in security and peace.

And so on this beautiful morning we thank you for your steadfast resolve, we appreciate your support of those brave souls who have volunteered in the face of the danger. We ask for God's blessings on the families and our troop in harm's way. And we thank you from the bottom of our collective hearts. God bless you all. (Applause.)

Photo by John Raughter

By Marty Conatser - The American Legion National Commander

When the term “betray” is used to describe any American general not named Benedict Arnold, it gets most people’s attention. When it is used in a New York Times advertisement to describe a brilliant wartime commander with the credentials of David A. Petraeus, it gets the 2.7 million member American Legion’s attention.

I met Gen. Petraeus when I visited Iraq earlier this summer. That I was impressed with this visionary officer is unsurprising and relatively unimportant. What is important is that the men and women serving under Gen. Petraeus believe in him. Their faith in the uniformed Princeton Ph.D. is not misplaced. Petraeus earned a reputation as a counterinsurgency genius early in the Iraq war when he commanded the 101st Airborne Division and basically rebuilt the government infrastructures in Mosul and Ninevah Provinces. As he mentioned in his congressional testimony, sectarian violence in Iraq is down - especially in the once wild Anbar Province. Local tribes are turning on al Qaeda and in many cases cooperating with the coalition. When one senator said Gen. Petraeus's firsthand report required "a willing suspension of disbelief," it seemed to this Midwesterner that it was Washington's way of calling him a liar.

Even so, the libelous attack on a general is not The American Legion’s primary concern about the anti-war movement. Our concern is for the private, the sergeant, the lieutenant and the major. If a distinguished general could be attacked in such a manner, what can the rank-and-file soldier expect when he or she returns home?

At our national convention last month in Reno, nearly 3,000 delegates unanimously passed Resolution 169, codifying The American Legion’s support for the global war on terror. The resolution recalls that Congress authorized the military action in both Iraq and Afghanistan and reminds Americans that you cannot separate the wars from the warriors. With nearly a million Vietnam veterans in our organization, the symbolism of such a resolution is striking. Never again should Americans be tarred as baby-killers, terrorists or criminals for risking their lives so others could be free.

With almost 170,000 American forces in Iraq, there will be some criminal acts from time-to-time. Find me a town anywhere in America with the same population and I promise you will find a higher crime rate than what is seen among our military. Where is the perspective when the headlines repeatedly remind us of those crimes, yet little is written about Army Reserve Capt. Joel Arends, who led a team in Baghdad through fire to rescue Iraqi civilians? And why are the convicted soldiers from Abu Ghraib more famous than Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham, who sacrificed his life smothering a grenade so that others would live?

As Americans, we all have a duty to speak up when our uniformed heroes are slandered. When a major media outlet accepts advertising revenue to mass produce such slander, we should be outraged. MoveOn.org can write anything it wants to, but the New York Times is not required to publish such libel.

Earlier this year, a presidential candidate called the Global War on terrorism a “bumper sticker.” I can think of 3,000 dead Americans who probably would disagree. “Support the troops,” however, really is a mere bumper sticker if we allow our fellow Americans, the media and our elected leaders to slander their heroism.

Marty Conatser is national commander of the 2.7-million member American Legion, the nation’s largest veterans organization.

DoD Photo

The National Commander of the nation’s largest veterans organization today called for “much resolve and patience” by Congress and the American people on the war in Iraq after Multi-National Force Iraq Commander Gen. David Petraeus’s testimony before Congress.

National Commander Marty Conatser voiced The American Legion's continued support for the "surge" in Iraq and the improving security environment.

"Gen. Petraeus forcefully and effectively reported measurable gains to the joint session of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees and his honest and professional assessment reinforced what I had seen in Iraq in the last month," Conatser said.

"General Petraeus's assessment that the military objectives are in large measure being met plus his reasonable proposal for a troop draw down prove the wisdom of the “surge” strategy,” Conatser explained.

He also applauded Gen. Petraeus's view that failure to follow through would be a ‘"rush to failure."’

“I visited Iraq in August and met with troops and Gen. Petraeus,” Conatser said. “There is no doubt in my mind, a premature troop withdrawal from Iraq would be disastrous for the Iraqis and the United States.”

Conatser said the troops he spoke with there said they’ve seen significant change and real improvements in the security environment, echoing what Gen. Petraeus told Congress today.

“The Senate confirmed Gen. Petraeus to change direction in Iraq,” Conatser added. “He’s doing that but change does not happen overnight and his “surge” strategy just became fully implemented in mid-June when the requested reinforcements finally arrived.

“In the broader context, this report to the Congress today demonstrates progress in the global war on terrorism,” the national commander said. “We agree with the Multi-Nation Force Iraq Commander that this will be a long struggle but we support our nation's forces and their leadership for the long haul.”

Two weeks ago, The American Legion unanimously re-affirmed The America