Blumenthal Puts Trump VA Nominees on Blast for Blatant Lack of Qualifications at Hearing

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] - At a Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee hearing today to consider pending nominations, Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) underscored the five nominees' jarring lack of qualifications for the roles they have been nominated for at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

"I'm just going to be very blunt. I'm gravely concerned that none of these nominees have any experience with veterans' benefits law, whatsoever, not as judges, not as lawyers, not as advocates for veterans," Blumenthal said in his opening.

Blumenthal raised scrutiny over the nominees to be judges at the Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (CAVC). He first highlighted a watchdog report on nominee Robert Fleck, which revealed Fleck engaged in nepotism and lied about sharing sensitive information when he worked at VA's Office of General Counsel: "Mr. Fleck, you were found by VA's Office of Inspector General to have engaged in nepotism when - as a manager in the Office of General Counsel - you advocated for the employment of your wife in that same office. You will have to explain to the Committee why the report done by the Office of Inspector General is not disqualifying, and I appreciate the Chairman's staff subsequently sharing the documents and information with us, which should prompt all of us to have very strong concerns, and I intend to make further inquiries about this issue. We have a constitutional duty of oversight."

Ahead of the hearing, VA intentionally redacted and withheld documentation requested by Democratic Committee staff related to the investigation into Mr. Fleck, while providing the Committee Republicans with additional, unredacted documents.

Blumenthal called into question another CAVC nominee, Daniel Rendleman, and his qualifications for the role in light of his radical anti-abortion views: "Mr. Rendleman, if confirmed, you would have the power to decide whether a veteran's claim for reproductive health care coverage or reimbursement is denied. The radical anti-abortion views you espouse call into question your ability to make impartial judgments on abortion-related claims."

The full text of Blumenthal's opening is below and available here.

Sen. Blumenthal: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like my full statement be entered in the record for. I'll condense it. Thank you, each of you, for your willingness to serve.

I'm just going to be very blunt. I'm gravely concerned that none of these nominees have any experience with veterans' benefits law, whatsoever, not as judges, not as lawyers, not as advocates for veterans.

Ms. Lopez, if confirmed, you would be responsible for ensuring that the Board of Veterans Appeals makes accurate, timely decisions on veterans' appeals. The board has been able to hire substantially more judges, attorneys, and staff thanks to bipartisan investments by Congress. But this administration has cut the board's budget, instituted a hiring freeze, and pushed out many of its employees and senior leaders. I want to know from you that you will stand up for the interests and values that Congress has sought to implement here.

Turning to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, you will have an interest, likewise in the public interest, Mr. Fleck. You were found by VA's Office of Inspector General to have engaged in nepotism when, as manager in the Office of General Counsel, you advocated for the employment of your wife in the same office. You will have to explain to the committee why the report done by the Office of Inspector General is not disqualifying, and I appreciate the Chairman's staff subsequently sharing the documents and information with us, which should prompt all of us to have very strong concerns, and I intend to make further inquiries about this issue. We have a constitutional duty of oversight.

Mr. Rendleman, if confirmed, you would have the power to decide whether a veteran's claim for reproductive health care coverage or reimbursement is denied. The radical anti-abortion views that you espouse call into question your ability to make impartial judgments on abortion-related claims, and I'd like to enter into the record, Mr. Chairman, a letter from 30 organizations, including the National Women's Law Center, Minority Veterans of America, the National Organization of Women, Common Defense, Physicians for Reproductive Care, and other organizations that have substantial numbers of veteran members who represent them concerned about Mr. Rendleman's nomination.

I'm concerned that we're considering Mr. Quinn for a position that will not open until next Congress, which is, I think, unprecedented in this Committee. In November, the American people will determine at the ballot which party should lead the Senate, not prejudging what the outcomes will be, but the new Congress should provide advice and consent on positions that will open when there is another Congress.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, before we get started, I'd like to address a really urgent and critical topic. The VA recently raised the ceiling for its Electronic Health Record contract with Oracle by $17 billion. $17 billion, without any notice to Congress or taxpayers. That's more than, by the way, the $13 billion cost estimate for the Major Richards Star Act, which some of my colleagues claim we can't afford without cutting benefits for other disabled veterans. I think we have bipartisan support for the Major Richard Star Act, but $17 billion for Oracle to extend a deeply troubled contract, I think, demands inquiry from this Committee, and so I'd like to formally request the Chairman hold a hearing on implementation of the Electronic Health Record contract, and I have a letter for the record signed by all Democratic members of the Committee with that request. Thank you.

-30-

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Tweet

1. Veterans