Federal prosecutors have declined to hold two senior VA executives accountable for allegedly abusing the agency’s relocation program to the tune of a combined $400,000.
Perhaps banking on the chance that everyone would be preoccupied with last-minute holiday shopping, the day before Christmas Eve, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia announced that it was declining a referral from the VA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) to prosecute VA executives Diana Rubens (Philadelphia) and Kimberly Graves (St. Paul).
Prosecutors will not take aim against the two senior VA executives the OIG concluded inappropriately misused their offices for personal gain by participating personally and substantially in creating vacancies and volunteering for these positions. Not only did the two women reap a windfall of almost $400,000 in relocation expenses, but the positions came with no pay decrease despite a sharp decline in job responsibilities.
As a slap on the wrist for this activity, in November the VA assigned the women to lower-level positions within the Veterans Benefits Administration that come with a pay cut. The VA recently, however, determined that in administering this “punishment,” its failure to provide all the evidence against them compromised Ruben’s and Grave’s due process rights. As such, it is now “redoing” these already woefully inadequate administrative actions.
By the way – the VA is not seeking recoupment of the $400,000 paid in relocation expenses, on the grounds that the monies were approved by higher-up VA officials. This is despite public outcry, the many scandals plaguing the agency, and the recent House Veteran Committee roasting of Rubens and Graves (hearings during which both women pled the fifth).
According to VA Deputy Secretary Sloan Gibson in a hearing before the House Veterans Affairs Committee, Graves and Rubens were “only guilty of using bad judgment in the relocations.” In his words of infinite wisdom, “in my opinion, the evidence collected by the IG does not support one violation of law. Not one violation of rule. Not even one violation of regulation related to relocation expenses.”
Clearly, Gibson is smarter than the OIG officials who compiled the September report analyzing the relocation scandal (that prompted Under Secretary of Benefits, Alison Hickey, to resign). Why have the OIG when this genius is available to police the VA’s ethics himself?
“Mr. Gibson, I think your statement is pretty damn inconsistent,” Rep. Jeff Miller, the Veterans Affairs chairman fired back during the hearing. “We’re all educated enough to know the definition of accountability but you and the secretary have decided to change that definition.”
Last summer, although the VA itself was keeping her on the payroll, the VA employee involved in the elf on a shelf scandal resigned based on public pressure. Maybe due process protection of government workers make them bulletproof, but in a war against corruption, there are other ways to bring down the bad guys.
To that end, I want to point out that in general, email addresses for VA employees all follow the same format: first name, period, last name, @va.gov. Just sayin.’
*Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Sarah Schauerte’s weekly blog on veteran issues at: https://legalmeetspractical.com. Remember to click the link sent to your email to activate your subscription!
Un-“F” believable.
Can’t say I’m surprised that the government looks after its own.
Can this be overturned? Is it final, or would enough outcry change things?
Unfortunately, it’s something within the discretion of the prosecutor’s office – they’ll examine each case to determine if there’s enough there to move forward. So unless something new comes to light, it looks like these folks won’t face criminal liability.
That hardly seems like accountability to me. (thumbs down)