House Votes to Make It Easier to Fire VA Officials Involved in Ongoing Scandal

House Votes to Make It Easier to Fire VA Officials Involved in Ongoing Scandal

The House voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to make it easier to fire senior Veterans Affairs officials involved in the healthcare scandal, just hours after President Barack Obama delivered a speech that failed to satisfy those looking to take quick action against the VA.

Members passed the VA Management Accountability Act in an easy 390-33 vote — the only “no” votes came from Democrats.

Apparently the House is fed up with Mr. "All Talk and No Action" Obama and in a non-partisan landslide vote, passed a bill that will allow the VA to fire senior members of the VA due to incompetence.

Passage of the bill is the latest domino to fall in the expanding healthcare scandal that has members of both parties fuming at the department. The VA recently admitted that long wait-times for health clinics contributed to the death of more than 40 veterans, and it later came out that the VA had known about these problems for years, but tried to cover up the problem.

In the face of calls for the resignation of VA Secretary Eric Shinseki, Obama’s White House speech fell flat on Wednesday for members who wanted to hear more. Obama essentially said he wanted to wait for an Inspector General report to come out, and indicated Shinseki would stick around to help fix the problem.

Sorry Obama but it looks like things are finally starting to fall apart for your corrupt administration that never wants to actually FIX any of its problems. We are tired of "wait and see" since you NEVER follow through on any of it. Even your own party is turning against you.

House bills are often opposed by Democrats, but in this case, two Democrats said the bill doesn’t go far enough. Rep Michael Michaud (D-Maine) said he supported the idea of turning the roughly 400 senior executive service workers into “at-will” employees.

But Michaud said he wished the bill also covered senior doctors and dentists, some of whom are thought to be part of the problem related to long wait times at VA clinics. Michaud said he hoped the House and Senate could add this language at a later point in the legislative process.

Another Democrat, Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.), made an emotional speech on the floor in which he said Shinseki needs to be the first person fired in the scandal. Scott blamed Shinseki’s failed leadership for military suicides in a Georgia hospital, and said VA officials told members of Congress during a visit that there were no more suicides to report.

“And they told a damn lie!” Scott bellowed. “The very next day it was exposed there was another soldier that committed suicide, and they covered it up!”

The tides are turning. Now we have to wait and see how the Senate will handle this bill. But seeing as how it was non-partisan in the House, maybe the same will hold true for the Senate.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

This entire mess is going to blow up in the Democrats face.

For officials to call for the resignation of Shinseki while saying nothing about Kathleen Sibelius - HHS, Eric Holder - DOJ, IRS, Clinton and Benghazi, Kerry .. etc etc etc leads me to the conclusion that some democrats are going to attempt to use this to distance themselves from Obama in the upcoming midterms.

I also find it problematic for people to lecture on holding people accountable when the people above are still in their current positions (except Clinton).

The buck stops at Obama and because of that I am sure we will see George Bush and the racist white people who don't like Obama being blamed.

a reply to: Xcathdra

To be honest, the reason I think that the Democrats jumped on board with this is because it would be political suicide to try to sweep this under the rug since it would appear like they weren't supporting veterans, especially with a very critical election coming up this November. Supporting veterans is definitely a non-partisan thing and Democrats can't be seen not doing that.

I think that the noise being made by the Republicans on this matter would be a little more believable if the Republicans hadn't filibustered the last attempt at raising the VA's budget.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

You do realize that raising the budget does nothing if it just goes to lining corrupt senior members' pockets right? What's the point of raising the budget if it is going to just make some assholes richer and not do anything to help the veterans? I mean look at our education system. We pay more on education than any other country, yet are ranking ABYSMALLY among the other 1st world nations. Yet every time this is brought up and attempted to be addressed, the go to fix is "throw more money at it."

I'm GLAD that they are trying a new tactic to fixing a government problem other than, "throw more money at it and hope it goes away." For once they are trying something new, and frankly the bill should pass and be signed into law. The government SHOULD be able to fire its workers much easier and not just in the VA either. Give them incentive to work a bit harder on things.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

To late - Hes known since 2008 during transition.

Obama transition team was told about 3 audits showing VA misreported wait times

President Obama’s transition team was warned in 2008 that repeated audits showed the Veterans Affairs Department was misreporting wait times for medical treatment, including one audit revealing delays nearly 10 times worse than the department was officially acknowledging.

The situation was so bad that the inspector general said it stopped trying to police the issue until the VA could prove its information was accurate — raising a red flag for the transition team, according to documents obtained by The Washington Times.

The documents, obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request, show the problem extended back to at least the middle of the Bush administration but remained unresolved when Mr. Obama won election in 2008, and the VA was unable to say this week whether it ever took any steps to correct the problems.

According to the documents, the VA inspector general told the Obama transition team of three audits dating back to 2005 that revealed significant problems with wait times and scheduling.

One of those audits showed an instance in which the department reported 2,900 veterans waited more than a month for medical appointments. The actual figure was closer to 28,000 veterans, according to the auditors.

Click link for remainder of article.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yes, I am aware that Obama was made aware of this back in 2008. I was more referring to the Democrats in the House who are desperately trying to hold onto their seat as the Democrats continue to lose favor across the country as all these scandals continue to pop up and plague Obama's administration.

I'm not really expecting Obama to act any different here then he has for any other scandal. He's a scum bag who graduated from Chicago politics. Fixing problems isn't a card in the deck he plays with. Though I imagine if the same support is shown for this bill in the Senate, Obama will have no choice but to sign it.

Obama should do like they did in the old days and appoint a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of all of this.

No wait... that wouldn't be in his best interests, would it?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
I think that the noise being made by the Republicans on this matter would be a little more believable if the Republicans hadn't filibustered the last attempt at raising the VA's budget.

That might be true but...

This latest issue seems to be focusing on "Waiting Lists" and the reduction of waiting times.

Even a 20% increase in a budget would not stop the employee bonus frenzy madness.

Why do you think the bonus money was never eliminated in favor of medical care?

Take a close look at the VA medical system and see why many Americans can't grip the "Socialized Medicine" bandwagon.

originally posted by: butcherguy
Obama should do like they did in the old days and appoint a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of all of this.

No wait... that wouldn't be in his best interests, would it?

Congress has to appoint a special prosecutor. Generally speaking the White House does not normally agree with Congress for a special prosecutor simply because it means the administration is the focus of the special prosecutor. Its Congress's way of checking the authority of the Executive branch when the DOJ declines to act / investigate their own for crimes.

a reply to: Xcathdra
Thanks, I forgot how that worked.

Its Congress's way of checking the authority of the Executive branch when the DOJ declines to act / investigate their own for crimes. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seems like Congress could appoint about a half a dozen special prosecutors.

a reply to: xuenchen

People trying to make an argument about wait times and bonuses are ignoring the fact that people died because of incompetence from top to bottom to top. Not being adequately funded is not a plausible excuse when records are falsified and administrators continue to receive a bonus.

Falsifying information that results in -
* - the death of individuals
* - bonuses for employees

is criminal and those involved should be investigated as part of a criminal conspiracy to defraud the American people while participating in an action that resulted in the death of people whose deaths could have been prevented.

Those deaths should be reclassified as homicides and the people involved should be charged accordingly.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I'm in agreement. These are people who put their lives on the line for America and everything it stands for. They were injured during that duty and these people not only didn't help them, they conspired to cover it up; meaning that they were not only aware, they didn't care.

That's good to hear, but until something actually gets done, this is nothing more lipservice, which is pretty common in politics (and it's non-partisan too). Hopefully that won't the case here.

This could not possibly make me happier, there are several people that both deserve and need help. Honestly though I will have to wait and see if it actually helps at all. Just knowing my brothers and sisters are not forgotten about and passed to the wayside lifts my spirits.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Krazysh0t

This entire mess is going to blow up in the Democrats face.

For officials to call for the resignation of Shinseki while saying nothing about Kathleen Sibelius - HHS, Eric Holder - DOJ, IRS, Clinton and Benghazi, Kerry .. etc etc etc leads me to the conclusion that some democrats are going to attempt to use this to distance themselves from Obama in the upcoming midterms.

I also find it problematic for people to lecture on holding people accountable when the people above are still in their current positions (except Clinton).

The buck stops at Obama and because of that I am sure we will see George Bush and the racist white people who don't like Obama being blamed.

absolutely

I'd be watching this. I see where the head if the VA (his job at risk) has fired serval managers at the AZ offices. I'd bet they sue the government, get all their lost pay back, and my even be able to keep their jobs. See this all the time in the FAA.

originally posted by: wrkn4livn
I'd be watching this. I see where the head if the VA (his job at risk) has fired serval managers at the AZ offices. I'd bet they sue the government, get all their lost pay back, and my even be able to keep their jobs. See this all the time in the FAA.

Termination should be the first step...


A formal criminal investigation should be conducted and charges laid if warranted. If people at the VA did not know these things were occurring then they are criminally negligent... If the people at the VA knew, then they are criminal.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Termination should be the first step...

I wonder at the choice of words.
The affected vets were terminated.
These people should end up in prison.... but they will probably just lose their jobs.

a reply to: butcherguy

I am not advocating anyone be "terminated" (ending their life). I am stating its not enough for people involved to lose their job. Termination from their job is step 1 - Step 2 is a criminal investigation and step 3 would be use of the judicial system.

now, depending on hos these vets ended up dying and what part these people played in that death could conceivably meet criteria for a death sentence.