Posted on Oct 29, 2015
V.A. Won’t Let 5 Officials Testify, Antagonizing Congress. More BS And Stalling?
3.97K
19
19
9
9
0
This appears to be some good information concerning the VA system's problems with their backlog and vets dying while waiting for assistance. It's the first I've heard about this, but it illustrates how far the VA Administration will go to cover their tracks.
The increasingly tense relationship between Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs was on display in a standoff Wednesday in which the department refused to allow five officials prominent in a report on misuse of authority and waste of government money to appear before the House Veterans Affairs Committee for questioning.
The department said allowing the officials to appear could jeopardize its ability to investigate the allegations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/us/va-wont-let-5-officials-testify-antagonizing-congress.html?_r=1
The increasingly tense relationship between Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs was on display in a standoff Wednesday in which the department refused to allow five officials prominent in a report on misuse of authority and waste of government money to appear before the House Veterans Affairs Committee for questioning.
The department said allowing the officials to appear could jeopardize its ability to investigate the allegations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/us/va-wont-let-5-officials-testify-antagonizing-congress.html?_r=1
Posted in these groups: 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Congress
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Congress
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 6
3
3
0
LTC Christopher Sands
Capt Seid Waddell - That would cost too much. No one wants to take the pittance that the government pays out.
(1)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
LTC Christopher Sands, that is what needs to change if we are to fix the VA system, sir. Plus, it is not clear to me that it would be more expensive than continuing to feed a broken bureaucracy that ill-serves the veterans; how much would it cost to serve all veterans efficiently and competently within the VA system vs the private sector?
I think the private sector would come in under budget and ahead of schedule compared to getting the exact same product from the VA.
Sacrificing service and quality to contain costs is a significant disservice to our veterans, IMHO.
I think the private sector would come in under budget and ahead of schedule compared to getting the exact same product from the VA.
Sacrificing service and quality to contain costs is a significant disservice to our veterans, IMHO.
(0)
(0)
LTC Christopher Sands
I thought McDonald was going to come in and really make changes. He has disappointed me.
(1)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
LTC Christopher Sands, you have to ask yourself just how much power he had to effect change, sir. Bureaucratic inertia is greater than any one man, and the "rules of engagement" under which he was operating made success very unlikely, IMHO.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
One thing that Obama and his administration has proven is that Congress is toothless and impotent. A lot of time and money could be saved it the administration lackeys would just use the emoticon of showing the bird to them and ignoring their requests. I do admit this is a transparent administration, they get in your face and say it the way they want the narrative to go. The public seems to like it though, given all the sucking up to Hillary.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I've been wondering for a long time if turning over the VA system to civilian health such as MD Anderson or other hospital organizations would be for the best. The VA as it is, is so broken, from the top down there is little chance of saving it.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Sure because their trying to stack the deck so Congress can't really find out what's going on. SSDD!
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I really didn't think they are this corrupt, but this has opened my eyes. It is very upsetting.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
"...5 U.S.C. § 7513 provides that, when there is reason to believe that a serious crime has been committed, the minimum notice period before a removal takes effect can be reduced from the usual 30 days, but the statute still provides seven days so that the employee can reply to the charges.” So why not apply this provision and get moving on the removal action? It's not like these folks are being forced to pay restitution are they?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google