GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Army secretary resigns amid Walter Reed scandal

• 21573
  

  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
• 21558
  

  "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
• 21540
  

  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
• 21536
  

  Two years ago the administration recommended Walter Reed's shut down and congress passed the recommendation into law via BRAC. Five years until the windows get boarded.

  The general is a fall guy. The admin and congress are the guilty. The army was and still is commanded to close Walter Reed.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 5, 2007 2:04 PM
• 21535
  

  Yes, there is a problem. It seems Congress should be looking at what was approved for budget and what was requested from the hospital. 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 sure there is blame to go all around and one is Congress. I applaud the government employee who told the new paper and the paper to print the story. However, I am sorry to say will not fix the fundamental cause and stories like this will continue.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 5, 2007 1:55 PM