JOHNNY ISAKSON. GEORGIA, CHAIRMAN JERRY MORAN. KANSAS JOHN BOOZMAN, ARKANSAS DEAN HELLER. NEVADA BILL CASSIDY. LOUISIANA MIKE ROUNOS, SOUTH DAKOTA THOM TILLIS, NORTH CAROLINA DAN SULLIVAN. ALASKA JON TESTER. MONTANA. RANKING MEMBER PATTY MURRAY, WASHINGTON BERNARD SANDERS, VERMONT SHERRUD BROWN, OHIO RICHARD ELUMENTHAL. CONNECTICUT MAZIE K. HIRONO. HAWAII JOE MANCHIN Ill. WEST VIRGINIA ??nitrd tantra Smart COMMITTEE ON AFFAIRS WASHINGTON, DC 20510 August 9, 2018 The Honorable Robert Wilkie Secretary of Veterans Affairs 810 Vermont Ave, NW Washington, DC 20420 Mr. Secretary, Congratulations once again on your con?rmation as Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Your focus, as you know, must be on ways to better provide veterans with the timely and quality healthcare and bene?ts they have earned, and you must ensure that frontline employees have the appropriate tools and knowledge to carry out that mission. We are concerned that many of the actions taken by VA in the time between your departure from the Acting Secretary role and your swearing-in as Secretary were planned and executed to serve political interests and agendas, rather than to serve the best interests of veterans. Several initiatives and actions moved forward without guidance and direction from any of?cials serving in Senate?con?rmed leadership positions. However, as evidenced by the broad bipartisan support for your confirmation, we believe you have the faith and confidence of the Senate to lead the Department based on the values you expressed in multiple Member meetings and in your con?rmation hearing. We want you to succeed, and veterans need you to succeed. For that to happen, you will need to right the ship at VA by reassuring the nonpartisan career employees that their institutional knowledge and dedication is valued, and by ensuring that everyone under your direction operates with one principle in mind to serve the nation?s veterans and not anyone?s political interests. Speci?cally, we ask you to review the following actions, as we strongly believe you should maintain the ability to make each of these decisions. During your review, we ask that you consider the long term impact of each decision on veteran services. Selection of Key Senior Leaders: Prior to your arrival, unconfirmed appointees selected and on boarded a new Principal Deputy under Secretary of Health. We believe this individual, while possibly very qualified, was brought on board without your input. In doing so, VA displaced a long-time career employee who had been serving as Executive in Charge, and who had the faith and confidence of VHA employees. We further believe this should have been a decision you were able to make upon your con?rmation. We also believe the selection of an Assistant Secretary for Information Technology should not have been moved forward by VA until you were in place. We hope you had the opportunity to interview the nominee in advance of his selection. Execution of Executive Orders Related to Labor: Acting leadership of the Department did not set you up for success in your relationships with employees by rushing the execution of the recent Executive Orders. According to brie?ngs from VA staff, many aspects of these orders were carried out based on guidance from the Acting Secretary and the front of?ce. And putting hundreds of VA employees into questionable status prior to your arrival is not operating in good faith. Acting leadership could have made the necessary preparations for such an E0, but should have waited for your approval before moving forward. - Damage Kev Relationship with Of?ce of Inspector General: As has been previously reported and discussed, the Acting Secretary, in your absence, sent an inappropriate communication to the Inspector General (1G), intimating that the 1G is not an independent body and works for and reports to the Secretary of the Department. That is patently false. The Senate subsequently took a unanimous vote to uphold the independence of the IG. We urge you to take steps to repair this relationship, and to con?rm that you recognize and value the independence of the 1G and any attempted interference, including withholding information, is unacceptable. I Elimination of Institutional Knowledge in Key Positions: Prior to you being sworn~in as Secretary, there were signi?cant changes made to the staf?ng of your personal of?ce. This included the dismantling of teams, reassignments based solely on perceived loyalties, and the elimination of all career civil servants at SES or levels from your immediate of?ce. Clearly, you should have a say in the staff working directly for you, but you were not given that opportunity. Additionally, while settling in and learning about the scope and magnitude of this job, it would have been bene?cial to have career employees whose loyalties are to veterans rather than political agendas surrounding you, who know the job and have served multiple prior Secretaries, and who could ultimately help you accomplish your objectives. We urge you to meet with these dedicated public servants and consider for yourself whether their knowledge of the processes and relationships across the Department might be helpful to you, and consider recalling their reassignments. Further, signi?cant changes were dictated to the incoming Under Secretary for Bene?ts by the same team that dismantled your immediate of?ce personnel. We urge you also to review whether these moves were political in nature and could have negative impacts on institutional knowledge about the programs within VBA. There will be real impacts for veterans based on the rushed changes in advance of your arrival. For example, the forcing out of two key employees at the Center for Women veterans has already resulted in signi?cantly fewer outreach opportunities to engage with this growing population, which could lead to increased rates of health issues and possibly to increased numbers of suicides in this cohort. Finally, we encourage you to recall the commitment you made in your con?rmation hearing to do what is best for veterans, even if it is in disagreement with others in the Administration. It is clear now that direction is often coming to VA from voices who are outside the Department, who may have ?nancial interests in the contracting decisions made, and who have not been entrusted to make decisions, through election to of?ce or con?rmation by the Senate, on behalf of this nation?s veterans. You must reject private interference and in?uence on your important and bipartisan work. Decisions must be made by Senate-con?rmed leadership based on what is in the best interest of veterans. As Secretary, our nation?s veterans are counting on you to safeguard them and the Department from inappropriate engagement from outside individuals. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to take your cues from veterans, and ensure that you are getting advice and input from career civil servants as well as political appointees. In order to make the best, most informed decisions, you will need signi?cant input from a variety of experienced sources, and fostering an environment in which dissenting views and alternative opinions are welcome is absolutely critical. With that in mind, a review of the above actions to determine that they are in line with your best judgement for veterans would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Emu-Airs Jon Tester Rich-arid J. Durbi'n United States Senator United States Senator Mid @0104 Sherrod Brown United States Senator Kammy aldwin United tates Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr. United States Senator Margaret Wood Hassan United States Senator MazieI Hirono United States Senator Va: Um Tom Udall United States Senator Bill Nelson United States Senator Wop/t. Mark Warner United States Senator Ron Wyden United States Senator ?ll/4; Tim Kaine United States Senator Chris Van Ho?l?len' United States Senator ?ag Brian Schatz United States Senator Richard Blmnenthal United States Senator JoeM chin, United tes Senator