When it comes to government contracting in the veteran-owned set-aside arena, there are different types of unsavory behavior. There are those who install a Rent-A-Vet, or set up pass-through corporations. There are others who lie about their own veteran status.
Then, there are those who receive millions of dollars in set-asides because “their foot hurts.”
During a June 26 hearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Representative Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) eviscerated federal contractor, Braulio Castillo of D.C. – based Strong Castle. Tammy Duckworth is an Iraq War veteran who lost both of her legs and severely injured her arm while in service. Castillo incurred a minor foot injury while in military prep school. Both are “service-disabled.” (As a mind-boggling side note, Duckworth has a 20% disability rating for her mangled arm. Castillo has a 30% rating for his foot injury).
Duckworth chastised Castillo for exploiting his service-connected status in order to win millions of contract dollars. Duckworth read from a letter Castillo had written to the government for purposes of securing contracts, which included the verbiage: “these are crosses that I bear due to my service to this great country, and I would do it again to protect this great country.”
In a voice dripping with sarcasm, Duckworth said: “I’m so glad that you would be willing to play football at prep school again to protect this great country…shame on you, Mr. Castillo. Shame on you. You may not have broken any laws…but you have broken the trust of this great nation.”
When I first heard about this, I thought of my father. He was stationed in Bad Kissingen during the tail end of the Vietnam War; however, he does not call himself a Vietnam War veteran because he feels that doing so would dishonor those veterans actually stationed in Vietnam. There is a line, and the fact that Dad sees it doesn’t mean he’s noble – just decent.
And what happens when someone like Castillo ignores the line? As Duckworth pointed out, not only does this type of action “game” the system and divert millions of dollars from eligible veteran-owned companies, but it affects veteran benefits: “If this nation stops funding veteran’s health care and calls into question why veterans deserve their benefits, it is because cases like you have poisoned the public’s opinions on these programs.”
On the flip side of this, it’s true that Castillo hasn’t broken any laws. He went through the disability compensation claim process like every other veteran. Right now, thousands of veterans who never engaged in active combat receive disability compensation, and the fact they never picked up a gun doesn’t make them any less disabled or less entitled to their “disabled status.” My father is a “disabled” veteran and he never set foot in a combat zone. He would never, however, imply that the nature of his disabilities was different in order to obtain a set-aside contract.
As a point of interest, Duckworth engaged in this public roast because Castillo was already in hot water – the hearing addressed a committee report focusing on Castillo’s close friendship with a top Internal Revenue Service (IRS) purchasing official who may have “influenced the [contractor] selection process” in favor of Strong Castle to allow it to secure $500 million in IRS contracts. When the IRS official exercised his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination and was dismissed from the hearing, Castillo found himself in the harsh spotlight.
Access Duckworth’s blasting of Castillo at: http://breakingdefense.com/2013/06/27/rep-tammy-duckworth-berates-dubious-disabled-vet-but-theres-a-deeper-problem/.
Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Legal Meets Practical’s weekly blog at: https://legalmeetspractical.com.
This is a tough one, I hate that she made fun of his legitimate service connected injury. If he was hurt while in uniform, even one worn by Cadets at The United States Military Academy Preparatory School, then he is entitled to his service connected status. However, if he lied about the way he was injured to jump his place in line, then I would consider it to be a fraud issue. Maybe these set-aside programs could weigh the nature of the injury, or how it happened, in the future? This is definitely one where there is no easy answer!