Discussion about this post

User's avatar
William Schubert's avatar

"Although the VA isn’t too affected by government shutdowns (because so much of the agency’s workforce are medical caregivers who are deemed “essential”)"

I have a nurse friend (neo natal) who works in a military hospital in Temple, TX who is most definitely NOT getting paid. She is absolutely essential and has been working many more shifts so I'm not sure about your statement. But she is paid by DOD, not VA and so is not paid. A fine distinction of 'essential'.

Expand full comment
Anne Meeker's avatar

Former Congressional caseworker here — I handled constituent services for a Member with a very veteran-heavy district and presence in Massachusetts. From that perspective, it is sometimes a double-edged sword that the VA Committees are so active: for both veterans and staff at the VA, the rate and volume of legislation means that the agency itself is a chaotic, conflicting hodgepodge of programs, restrictions, pots of funding, designated staff, modernization projects, etc., where nothing sunsets, nothing outdated is replaced, everything is always additive, because every program has a constituency and it's politically unforgiving to be seen as taking something away from veterans (I mean, fair!). Every Member on the VA committee wants to create a new program, and they have a good shot at doing so with the pace of those committees' work and relative bipartisan support for VA-related programs.

Working in the state capacity/Congressional capacity space now, I do think a lot about how we could work to cherrypick the best parts of the one-committee-one-agency model that DOES let legislation move fairly quickly, but coupled with more outcomes-driven approaches to legislating that might be a little bit less prone to creating statutory sediment.

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?