Late April marked the third time in the House Veterans Affairs Committee’s 69-year history that it voted to issue a subpoena to mandate release of information.
In a scathing audit released in early April, the VA Inspector General confirmed a litany of problems first raised by whistleblowers at the Philadelphia Regional Office (RO), involving such claims such as manipulation of dates to make old claims look new. Many of these whistleblowers were VA employees who alleged they had been subject to retaliation for attempting to report these issues.
To further investigation into this issue, the subpoena will demand that the VA provide its personnel and complaint files at the Philadelphia office. According to Jeff Miller, who has chaired the Committee since 2011, this information has been repeatedly asked for during the last few months with little success.
“There are serious issues plaguing the Philadelphia RO,” he said. “We can no longer let the VA stonewall [on providing the information].” Miller added that documents the Committee has received have been so heavily redacted that they provide little or no information.
“There is a growing list of examples of the VA attempting to impede our congressional oversight and limit their transparency,” said Miller, who is now seeking records going back to December 2008.
After the vote to subpoena the records, VA Secretary Bob McDonald quickly responded with a letter to Miller, pointing out that the department has already provided “nearly 9,000 pages of material … with more to follow.” The letter also noted that the VA had offered to make available the full, un-redacted information sought by the Committee, noting that this had not been done due to Committee staff members’ failure to agree to “certain reasonable privacy conditions.” Secretary McDonald concluded by reiterating the VA’s commitment to providing the files.
While we can’t know what types of records were provided by the VA and the substance of the redacted (private) information, I note that this is only the third subpoena issued in the Committee’s history – surely this isn’t something that is taken lightly.
But still, despite the Committee members’ cognizance of a subpoena as a “last resort” type of measure, consider the political and emotional climate here – our veterans are suffering, and given the litany of recent scandals, the Committee is willing to use more forceful measures.
Then there’s the point that a subpoena is something the Committee actually can do. Allison Hickey, the VA’s undersecretary for benefits, said the top manager and employee who altered the quality reviews have been reassigned pending an internal review. That’s right – reassigned, not fired. (The VA can’t do anything about this – government employees have ironclad property rights in their jobs, so it’s incredibly hard to fire one. We learned that last year).
A subpoena, however, forces the VA to respond. Not only that, but this action is public, and drastic, and if you Google this issue you’ll find a number of military organizations and publications reporting on the matter. And guess whose side they’re on?
My guess is the Committee has a bunch of records coming its way.
*Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Sarah Schauerte’s legal blog on veterans issues at legalmeetspractical.com. Remember to click the link sent to your email to activate your subscription!
Good, it’s about time we shine the disinfecting light of day on the VA writ large. I hope that we can finally start rewarding those employees who truly love the veterans, and firing those who are failing at their jobs or mistreating America’s veterans.