Veterans Affairs chief Eric Shinseki quits. Will that solve VA's problems?

In the end, combined pressures resulting from mismanagement at VA health facilities proved too much for Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki to withstand. President Obama accepted his resignation Friday.

|
Charles Dharapak/AP
Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki pauses while speaking at a meeting of the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, Friday, May 30, 2014, in Washington.

Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki resigned under pressure on Friday as it became apparent that mismanagement at VA health facilities was more serious and more widespread than officials had previously acknowledged.

An interim report from the VA inspector general released on Wednesday concluded that hidden waiting lists and delays in obtaining care were common throughout the VA hospital system. These problems weren’t limited to the troubled Phoenix facility where they first became public, in part due to a whistle-blower’s efforts.

Democrats had begun calling for Secretary Shinseki to go, and in the end the combined pressures proved too much for him to withstand. After firing senior leaders at the Phoenix hospital and eliminating bonuses for officials systemwide, the former Army chief of staff then went to the Oval Office on Friday morning and offered to quit, too. President Obama accepted the resignation.

“It was [Shinseki’s] judgment that he could not carry out the next stages of reform without being a distraction himself.... I regret that he has to resign under these circumstances,” Mr. Obama said.

The question now is whether Shinseki’s resignation will quiet the political uproar surrounding the VA or whether Congress in general and Republicans in particular will continue to hammer on the administration for apparent shortcomings in veterans’ care.

In the short term, the latter course is more likely due to the timing of the political cycle.

The resignation of a cabinet official is in essence the admittance of a mistake, either by the official in question or by the administration at large. With midterm elections coming up, expect the heart-tugging subject of veterans’ health care to show up in races across the country. And after fall 2014, the presidential campaign will start to simmer. GOP hopefuls will probably try to use the VA as a symbol of larger administration mismanagement that (they hope) might stick to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton as well.

Presumably the White House will at some point look for a permanent successor to Shinseki. (Deputy Secretary Sloan Gibson will run the department in the interim.) That would require Senate hearings, a ready-made and TV-friendly format for the GOP to try to frame the VA’s problems in as negative a manner for Obama as possible.

In general, high-profile firings or resignations don’t help a president much in the polls, writes University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato in Politico.

“It can easily be counterproductive, bringing to the public’s attention in a dramatic fashion that there is trouble afoot, serious enough to have cost someone his or her job,” Mr. Sabato writes.

That said, both parties do have some incentives to cooperate to fix the VA’s problems. Pretty much every member of Congress has a substantial number of veterans in their district. VA facilities are dispersed throughout the country, in red and blue states. Veterans health care is not per se a partisan issue: Democrats and Republicans alike want those who served the nation to get the care they need and deserve.

The problem is that shortening wait times won’t be easy or cheap. The number of eligible vets has been rising sharply in the wake of long US conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The demand for VA primary-care appointments has gone up by 50 percent in the past three years, according to department documents cited by The New York Times. But the number of primary-care doctors in the VA system has increased by only 9 percent.

The VA pays doctors about 25 to 30 percent less than they can typically earn in private practice, making recruitment of new physicians in the current competitive market a difficult government task.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Veterans Affairs chief Eric Shinseki quits. Will that solve VA's problems?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2014/0530/Veterans-Affairs-chief-Eric-Shinseki-quits.-Will-that-solve-VA-s-problems
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe