On October 7th, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) announced its intentions to fire four senior officials as part of a crackdown following a nationwide scandal over long wait times for veterans needing medical care, and falsified records covering up the delays.
House cleaning? More like a light dusting. Of the rocking chair in the second guest bedroom. With a dry paper towel.
Let’s take a look at these four individuals who are being used as examples. One, the director of a medical clinic in Georgia, was already halfway out the door, having announced his retirement in September. So his “firing” for all intents and purposes doesn’t even affect him.
Another is Susan Taylor, the former deputy chief procurement officer who is accused of steering VA contracts to a specific company. Taylor had tried to leave the VA for the Department of Energy after a scathing Office of Inspector General report said she acted inappropriately, but the Energy Department has rescinded that offer.
The third is Terry Wolf, the former director of the Pittsburgh VA Healthcare System. She was placed on paid leave in June shortly after reports that Legionnaires’ disease spread through the VA and infected more than 20 veterans.
These remaining three individuals proposed for firing are safe for now. Being “proposed” for firing means an individual goes through a process that was established by recently passed law. This law provides that the VA secretary can decide to fire or demote someone, giving the employee advance notice so they can respond to the charges. After the VA receives the response, if it decides to proceed with the firing, the employee has seven days to appeal that decision to the Merit Systems Protection Board. The Board has 21 days to rule on that decision, and failure of the Board to reach a decision makes the secretary’s decision final.
Most likely, these employees will get the axe given public outcry. But considering these proposed firings come months and months after their behavior, it seems non-sensical to put a process in place to double-check that lying to government officials and engaging in other shenanigans means you shouldn’t be entrusted with protecting our veterans. (It’s true, however, that government employees have a constitutional property right to their jobs, but that’s a whole other issue).
Why does the VA keep doing this to itself? Ask any veteran about what is going on lately with VA medical care and what they think of the VA, and the veteran will either share rage or extreme sadness. So why does the VA keep bringing such criticism upon itself? These three individuals “proposed” for firing have been written up in the media for scandalous behavior that affects the health and welfare of our veterans – how is it that months later they’re being “proposed” for removal?
And only three individuals? It takes many, many problems and people to make a system as broken as the VA, and a thorough house cleaning, complete with termite tents and flea bombs, is what we need here.
Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Sarah Schauerte’s weekly blog on veterans issues at: https://legalmeetspractical.com.
“Here is a three email series I recently exchanged with the GAO”
Lord, Stephen M
Oct 6 (4 days ago)
Dear Mr. Hernandez,
Thank you for communicating your interest in our recent VA review. We share your concerns about VA’s billing and collection process, and agree that the weaknesses highlighted in our report has impaired VA’s efforts to collect timely revenues from its external stakeholders and properly record revenues to its medical-care appropriations account at West Los Angeles. As you undoubtedly noticed, we made six important recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to resolve these deficiencies, and we plan to carefully follow-up with VA to ensure that they implement these recommendations. I can assure you that our work on this topic has still not been completed. I also appreciate your interest in notifying other parties about our report findings.
Thanks again for your note, and for reading our new report!
Sincerely,
Steve Lord, Managing Director
Forensic Audits and Investigative Service
U.S. Government Accountability Office
From: Howard Hernandez [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 12:21 AM
To: GAO Webmaster; Siggerud, Katherine A; Young, Charles; Hector Elizalde; Kara Medrano; Ricardo Mendoza; IAVA Paul Rieckhoff
Cc: Julie Rodriguez; [email protected]; [email protected]; Lee Rivas
Subject: GAO Wilshire VA Accountability Report
GAO Directors and Congressional Representatives,
I believe it is time to refocus the supposed “negotiations” on behalf of the Veterans. When 1.5 million is reported as being contracted for, only $700,000.00 of which is actually collected, and $681,000.00 misappropriated and another $50,000.00 is actually utilized for maintenance of the grounds. I believe that leaves a negative $31,000.00? I am proposing a formal complaint or information to the Office United States Attorney General.
I understand the GAO did not receive complete access to all information on documents in the possession of the District Court in Los Angeles in the Shinseki v. Valenti case, and additional documents were altered prior to being presented to the investigators conducting the audit. I am demanding a forensic audit for the period commencing on January 2000 to the present.
As a disabled Vietnam Combat Veteran, I have every intention of contacting the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, the Office of the United States Attorney General and all local and National Representatives of Congress, as well as the current administration.
Kindly respond at your earliest possible convenience. Thank you.
Howard Hernandez, Chairman/Commander AGIF
City of Commerce American GI Forum Chapter
Veterans Advisory Committee
National Education, Advocacy and Training
213-305-0009
Mr. Stephen M. Lord,
First and foremost, Thank you for the performance of your duty and the service you provide myself and my fellow Brothers and Sisters in arms.
After reviewing the GAO WLA Report, I can tell you I was in shock at the misappropriation of revenues and the failure of the Veterans representatives to account for and collect the revenues. I believe a complete forensic audit for the last 20 years of the WLA VA are in order in an effort hold those Veteran representatives accountable. While your recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs may resolve the deficiencies identified in the GAO report, restitution and collections of revenues from all public and private parties must be sought. As I have previously stated I am pursuing the filing a formal complaint and a Criminal information with the Office of the Attorney General, State Attorney General, the Los Angeles County and Los Angeles City Attorneys offices.
As for the external stakeholders, it is apparent from the Judgement issued in Shinseki V. Valenti the so-called external stakeholders are nothing more than illegal interlopers. These shameless interlopers have taken advantage of their position in the community and self indulgence while our homeless veterans sleep on the streets, commit suicide at the alarming rate of 22 Veterans per day, and burdening our Veteran families with providing the care of our disabled Veterans.
As a disabled Vietnam Combat Veteran, I have been involved in addressing this very issue for the last 3 1/2 year while a substantial number of other Veterans from various VSO have been attempting to have these very issues for the last decade plus. You will excuse me if I express some skepticism at any assurances from the same Veterans Administration that opposed it’s own disabled and homeless Veterans attempting to legally refocus the mission of the 1888 Deed of trust to provide for the Homeless and Disabled Veterans of the United States Military. I have more than just an interest in the restoration of the West Los Angeles Veterans Home. I will continue contacting and publishing all information with regard to the Veterans West Los Angeles Home.
I await the results of your expedient resolution to address these overwhelming Veteran issues.
Thank you.
Howard Hernandez, Chairman