Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Oversight Hearing

House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

2025-02-06

Loading video...

Summary

The first hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations focused on accountability within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), particularly concerning employee misconduct, leadership failures, and the quality of veteran care[ 00:17:21-00:17:29 ] [ 00:17:57-00:18:10 ]

. While the Chair emphasized the need for bipartisan work to hold the VA to its mission, the discussion quickly revealed significant partisan divisions regarding the causes of these issues and the most appropriate solutions[ 00:17:37 ] [ 00:31:26 ] .

VA Accountability and Employee Performance

The majority expressed concern that the VA has consistently failed to hold "bad employees" accountable, often protecting career government employees at the expense of veterans and allowing bureaucracy to take precedence over veteran care[ 00:17:57-00:18:33 ]

. Instances were cited where VA leaders faced little discipline despite substantiated allegations and were even promoted after misconduct[ 00:18:39-00:18:40 ] [ 00:19:53 ] . The reintroduced Restore VA Accountability Act of 2025 aims to ensure that VA employees are held accountable and that only the best federal employees serve veterans[ 00:19:54-00:20:02 ] . In contrast, the minority argued that the hearing's intent was to undermine the VA and vilify its public servants, accusing the administration of seeking to privatize the VA for profit by making the federal government a hostile workplace and replacing skilled employees with loyalists or outsourced contractors. Witnesses from the VA stated that the Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection (OAWP) investigates allegations against senior leaders and whistleblower retaliation, reporting a high rate of management acceptance for its disciplinary recommendations and improved case closure times. The VA also reported using Title V authority for over 5,000 adverse actions (removals, suspensions, demotions) in the last fiscal year, asserting that these actions are legally defensible and are employed at similar or higher rates than previous accountability laws[ 00:55:19-00:55:26 ] .

Quality of Veteran Care and Patient Safety

Concerns were raised about specific failures in veteran care, including a veteran with cancer in Buffalo who did not receive care for 10 weeks and poor management at the Hampton VA Medical Center leading to staffing shortages and ongoing quality-of-care issues[ 00:19:10-00:19:19 ]

. The Inspector General's office highlighted that inadequate quality assurance processes, lack of proactive oversight, and staff vacancies contribute to patient risks and delays in care[ 00:48:25-00:48:29 ] . The VA's Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is working to become a High-Reliability Organization (HRO) to achieve "zero harm" and improve patient safety, with the Office of Medical Inspector (OMI) assessing care quality and recommending corrective actions. However, questions were raised about the impact of a federal hiring freeze on staffing levels necessary to provide quality care, with particular focus on the Buffalo VA Medical Center.

Political Influence and Oversight Bodies

The minority strongly criticized the administration for "sabotaging" the VA, launching a "witch hunt" against employees, and allegedly using Elon Musk's team to access private veteran data, viewing these actions as part of a larger plan to privatize the VA[ 00:30:09-00:30:16 ]

[ 00:30:24 ] [ 00:30:24-00:30:31 ] [ 00:30:50 ] . Particular concern was expressed over the firing of VA Inspector General Michael Missel and other IGs, which was deemed illegal and detrimental to independent oversight. The Inspector General testified that their office provides independent oversight, making numerous recommendations and generating significant monetary impact through investigations of fraud, waste, and abuse. OAWP detailed its improvements in investigative quality and its role in advising the Secretary on accountability matters. A witness also warned that weakening civil service protections, such as through the reinstatement of Schedule F, could make government workers less likely to report misconduct and subject the civil service to partisan pressure.

Tone of the Meeting

The meeting exhibited a highly contentious and partisan tone, particularly during the opening statements and throughout discussions involving the political context of VA accountability[ 00:31:26 ]

. While the Chair initially called for bipartisan collaboration on veteran care, the Ranking Member immediately challenged this, accusing the majority of ulterior motives related to VA privatization and politicizing the workforce[ 00:17:37 ] [ 00:30:56 ] . Democratic members frequently expressed alarm over perceived political interference, hiring freezes, and the dismissal of the VA Inspector General, contrasting sharply with the majority's focus on individual employee and leadership accountability for specific failures[ 00:30:24-00:30:31 ] . Despite the strong political disagreements, the witnesses from the VA and OIG maintained a largely professional and objective demeanor in their responses regarding departmental operations and oversight processes[ 00:46:13-00:46:18 ] .