Over the weekend, Veterans Administration Secretary David Shulkin was fired. No, wait, he resigned. What happened?
CHUCK TODD:
Let me start with just a simple question. Were you fired or resigned? Because the White House now claims you resigned.
DAVID SHULKIN:
Well, you know, I came to the V.A. because our men and women in the country fight for us and don’t give up. And I came to fight for our veterans. And I had no intention of giving up. There would be no reason for me to resign. I made a commitment. I took an oath. And I was here to fight for our veterans. [Meet The Press]
So why is this more than a tempest in a teapot? Steve Benen explains:
As it happens, we know the answer. Politico reported over the weekend that the fired-vs-resigned distinction “could have far-reaching implications that could throw the Department of Veterans Affairs, the second-largest federal agency, into further disarray.”
In announcing the removal of Shulkin as VA secretary, Trump tapped Defense Department official Robert Wilkie as the acting leader of the department, bypassing Shulkin’s deputy, who was next in line to succeed him. That decision has reignited a debate among legal experts about the president’s ability to hand-pick replacements for ousted Cabinet secretaries.
The debate centers on vague language in the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, which gives the president broad authority to temporarily fill a vacancy at a federal agency with an acting official if the current office holder “dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office.”
In other words, if Shulkin didn’t resign, the president’s personnel authority is far more limited. What’s more, if Shulkin was fired – and literally every piece of evidence makes clear that he was – then he should be replaced by Deputy Secretary Thomas Bowman until the Senate confirms a permanent successor.
But the White House doesn’t like Bowman, an opponent of the far-right privatization push.
If you’re a vet, and you think the V.A. is going roughly in the right direction (based on how my Dad, a medically retired Air Force officer, was treated over the years, I think it is), even with its known flaws and scandals, you should be alarmed. Private sector medicine, despite the efforts of the individual medical personnel employed by them, is by and large dedicated to making money, and in some institutions that goal mutilates the medical goal.
This, in essence, is an attempt to do an end-around the rules, just for the right to temporarily appoint the proper ideological agent to the post. Perhaps the Administration believes that having the guy in the post, with a bit of a record, will be enough to sway a Senate that may otherwise be disinclined to privatize the V.A. As I understand it, most vets rather strongly believe it should not be, so this would go against the will of a lot of voters, although not all of them are Republicans. The Senate may be viewed by the White House as somewhat fragile on the topic, faced with a GOP base that nearly always backs the President, and the vets, who mostly prefer the V.A. as it’s currently formulated.
If you’re a vet, get the word out. I’m sure the big vet organizations already have, but it’s worth reiterating.
