Watchdog Group: Trump’s Latest VA Shakeup Is Still Illegal

on May 18, 2018 in Washington, DC.
WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 18: Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie (L) is seen as U.S. President Donald Trump (R) announces his intention to nominate Wilkie to be the next Veterans Affairs Secretary during ... WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 18: Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie (L) is seen as U.S. President Donald Trump (R) announces his intention to nominate Wilkie to be the next Veterans Affairs Secretary during a summit at the East Room of the White House May 18, 2018 in Washington, DC. The White House hosted a summit to discuss prison reform. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

An independent watchdog group told TPM that President Trump’s appointment Wednesday of Department of Veterans Affairs Chief of Staff Peter O’Rourke to temporarily run the agency is illegal. The group, Democracy Forward, had joined with the veterans’ advocacy group VoteVets to sue the Trump administration in April over its previous appointment of an acting VA secretary.

John Lewis, Democracy Forward’s lead attorney on the case, told TPM that Wednesday’s announcement that O’Rourke will lead the department on a temporary basis while Wilkie steps aside to complete the confirmation process does not alter the underlying argument of their case: that it’s illegal under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act for the president to fire a Cabinet official and hand-pick his or her replacement.

“The statutory text is very clear. The law says that an acting replacement can only be appointed if the official died, resigned or is unable to serve,” Lewis said. “Since Shulkin was fired, the the administration’s decision to select O’Rourke is another sign of how the administration is willing to break the law to get their favored people in power at the VA.”

Lewis says that under the normal order of succession at the VA, Deputy Secretary Thomas Bowman should have been made acting secretary when Shulkin was fired. Instead, the Trump administration tapped Wilkie as acting secretary and nominated his personal doctor Ronny Jackson to be confirmed to the position. When Jackson’s candidacy fell apart amid allegations that he drank on the job, handed out medication without a prescription, and created a toxic work environment for his colleagues, Trump nominated Wilkie to lead the agency on a permanent basis.

Shulkin has said publicly that he believes he was fired because of his opposition to the Trump administration’s agenda of privatizing the VA. The White House previously considered firing Bowman as a tactic to intimidate Shulkin and pressure him to go along with the pro-privatization party line.

Democracy Forward’s lawsuit cites news reports and official communications to argue that the Bowman was repeatedly passed over for the acting secretary gig for political reasons, a move that would violate the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.

“The President appears to have bypassed Deputy Secretary Bowman due to Bowman’s opposition to privatization of VA health services,” the complaint says. “In an email sent in December 2017, the President’s senior advisor on veterans affairs, Jake Leinenkugel… described Bowman as an ‘obstructionist’ opposed to the administration’s privatization agenda.”

Lewis told TPM that the Trump administration’s latest move to once again select a replacement is “a very troubling sign of the President’s treatment of the civil service.”

The Trump administration must respond to the lawsuit by early July, and a ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is likely sometime this fall.

Latest DC
8
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. An independent watchdog group named Democracy Forward…

    I’ll bet they’ve been busy this past year and a half.

  2. Oh pish-posh, tRump has concluded, laws are for little people.
    Full steam ahead…

  3. Correct and as a VA user you can place bets that privatization will cost us the taxpayer $$$$$BILLIONS$$$$$ while services hit the crapper. Example, had brain surgery in September 2017 at a local hospital, the Neurosurgeon charged less than 1/2 the ENT guy did. For an under 5 minute progress exam a month later the ENT charged the VA $847, plus a $50 copay. The Neurosurgeon charged for his follow up exam $0.

  4. In every way possible, this nutjob in the White House is a disaster. I hope you’re doing well. Brain surgery is daunting even without having to worry about costs. If you had to add the stress of costs to your healthcare with how they’d screw up privatization, only to make health companies benefit from added costs, it would only spiral out of control into added costs down the road for all beneficiaries. Like car insurance, I’ve never experienced a reduction in how much I pay for any extended period of time unless I went with a bare-bones policy. Its just not in their business model.

    I feel the same way about privatization and the theocratic takeover of our public school system by Betsy DeVos. She’s a one woman wrecking ball and has put the CEO of Devry, who was being sued for cheating students and making them pay for their malfeasance, in charge of recouping student loans that should have been forgiven according to the previous administration under Obama. Its flat out corruption. Not to mention the way she uses our taxpayer money to re-segregate our schools with her charter school initiatives. She’s already single-handedly fucked up Michigan public schools, which used to be among some of the best schools in the country, with her strong-arm tactics and takeover here with our legislature. She simply funded enough politicians with her billions to give her what she wanted. That’s how these tRumpsters work. They buy off politicians and keep them in their back pockets whenever they want them to vote their way.

  5. Avatar for paulw paulw says:

    So who is going to take this issue up? The republican-controlled courts, or the republican-controlled congress?

    And at best, what we get is not even a public pillorying. It’s a court order (that can in turn be ignored and litigated) telling the administration to follow the clear letter of the law.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

2 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for srfromgr Avatar for blandsten Avatar for ljb860 Avatar for c_stedman Avatar for thankavet

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: