GovernmentExecutive.com

Army Secretary Francis Harvey resigned from his post Friday afternoon amid concerns that service officials have shown "too much defensiveness" in responding to squalid living conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced.

"I am disappointed that some in the Army have not adequately appreciated the seriousness of the situation pertaining to outpatient care at Walter Reed," Gates told reporters in a brief statement announcing Harvey's resignation.

Gates and Harvey agreed earlier this week to fire Maj. Gen. George Weightman as Walter Reed chief. But Harvey caused an uproar when he named Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley, Army surgeon general and former head of Walter Reed, as the temporary commander of the facility.

Kiley, according to reports, had ignored the substandard conditions at Walter Reed during his two-year tenure as the medical center's chief.

The Army announced shortly after Gates' announcement that Maj. Gen. Eric Schoomaker will be the new commander at Walter Reed. Schoomaker, the brother of the Army's outgoing chief, now commands the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command at Ft. Detrick, Md.

"Gen. Eric Schoomaker has the right blend of leadership, professional expertise and personal experience for this position," Army Vice Chief of Staff Richard Cody said in a statement. Meanwhile, Army Undersecretary Preston (Pete) Geren, a former Democratic House member from Texas, will serve as the service's acting secretary until Gates names a replacement for Harvey.

Also Friday, House Oversight and Governmental Reform Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., issued a subpoena to Weightman compelling him to appear before his panel's National Security Subcommittee at a Monday hearing at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Weightman had been scheduled to testify, but the Army refused to authorize him to appear after he left his post, according to a committee statement.

The Senate Armed Services Committee also announced Friday afternoon that Weightman would not testify during a hearing the panel plans Tuesday on the conditions at Walter Reed.

But the committee will hear from Cody and Kiley, as well as David Chu, Defense undersecretary for personnel and readiness, and William Winkenwerder, assistant Defense secretary for health affairs.

The conditions at Walter Reed came to light last month in a series of reports by The Washington Post detailing infested conditions at one of the buildings on the facility's campus. The Post also reported bureaucratic hurdles wounded soldiers must jump through for follow-up care.

COMMENTS

• Let's talk about BRAC as well as competitive outsourcing. Both require "sacrificial lambs." Someone made the decision about which part of their organization was going to be offered up for sacrifice in the name of taxpayer savings, restructuring, efficiency, etc., etc. These processes, as designed, suck up federal tax dollars to support flawed legislation and processes, a multiplicity of research studies; feasibility studies by expensive consultants; the waste of time by federal employees required to participate in task teams to support these efforts (instead of meaningful work related to the agency mission); physical moves to support the newly formed organization that again requires many taxpayer dollars; years (five to ten years is not unusual) of rebuilding the organization to replace expertise that may have been lost in the process until it can once again become an efficiently operating unit. How much money could be saved if you look at how this has been done repeatedly across the federal government? Not to mention preventing the fall-out from these endeavors: loss of resources, loss of priorities, loss of expertise, lack of motivation, apathy, loss of attention to important details, and the list goes on. Is it any wonder Walter Reed has fallen into such a state? It was more important as a "sacrificial lamb" offered up by the Army to support administrative and congressional goals than it was as a "state of the art health facility" for our wounded veterans. Seems our priorities need to be realigned! GovExec.com reader Posted March 6, 2007 11:46 AM
• "When Congress short changed the military the last two fiscal years, somewhere the effects of fewer funds will appear; it happened to appear at Walter Reed Hospital. I am sure it not the only operational organization that must do more with less; the golden word from Congress - "do more with less." " I agree that the military was reduced but not nearly enough. The failure at Walter Reed simply underscores the inability of the military to set proper priorities on the funding they do have. Just study the TDY budgets of the Army and see if there isn't enough there to have paid for Walter Reed. Or look at the amount they spent making bases look good and see if they couldn't have cut there to cover the top needs. The simple fact is the military did not think Walter Reed was a priority and send the money to more important things like travel, and the care and feeding of the generals. Now Congress and the American public is saying the military and DoD did not set proper priorities. I think congress needs to get more involved in oversight and changing the priorities for the military but they have not even started. Also, the BRAC list starts with the military - not the administration or Congress. The Army had to agree to put Walter Reed on the BRAC list or it never would have gotten to the white house for approval and sent to the BRAC commission. I wonder what the press would have printed if the Army had spent a lot of money beefing up the facilities at a base scheduled to close? Maybe they should go back a round when McGuire AFB in New Jersey was removed from the list at the last second by the commission (headed by a person from New Jersey) and Plattsburg was substituted in its place when Plattsburg had almost all new facilities. That was a real BRAC joke. How was Walter Reed handled by the BRAC commission? taxpayer Posted March 6, 2007 9:08 AM
• This disgrace goes back to the Clinton administration and their distaste for the military. It takes more than 6 years for this kind of deterioration. Same goes for troop rotation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The downsizing of the military in the 1990s is showing now and the troops are the ones suffering for it. People need to wake up and get rid of the career politicians (Ted Kennedy, Diana DeGette, etc) to change this country around. GovExec.com reader Posted March 5, 2007 7:17 PM