I appreciate what the secretary is doing with the restructuring and coming up with a strong internal audit system. However i must express that i am skeptical about how that is going to work. We have the whistleblower protection act but its not enforced. My concern burst of office we have heard so much testimony in thandthe committee about a cultf secrecy and culture of retaliation, and retaliation is a huge deterrent to hearing the complaints. So my first question is to you we heard theres been retaliation against employees. I encountered there is retaliation against patients who might feel they have a complaint against a facility. Are you aware of any retaliation against patients or veterans . I think thats a really important question. Im not aware of any retaliation in part because my Agency Jurisdiction is for employees to come forward with retaliation complaints or disclosures of waste, fraud, abuse or Health Safety problems. Someone could come to us if they thought that a patient
I like to say that we are in a highly constrained environment here in washington, d. C. I think we can all agree to that. Is there more that you can do . If there were more funding, is there more that you could do or are you at a point where you recognize the reality that funding is in short supply and the chances of maybe getting more is not so great at this point . What is your sense of that . One thing is to do more with less. For instance, in the area of designing educational curriculums, we have our own inhouse studio. We create the content that we use. We dont have to use thirdparty vendors. I can be expensive. We leverage our partnerships with various companies. They service the distribution platforms. Where we need to be further engaged is getting in front of the schools on a nationwide basis, not on a community by community or even statebystate, but on a nationwide approach because we have the ageappropriate messaging. It is not a onesizefitsall. And we can track these kids fr
Responsible into bring them and bring them to justice. Are joined by the dutch in australian ministers. We extend our deepest condolences to those countries, the families of the people they represent an all the people who lost loved ones on that plane. Today givese here even greater urgency to our call for the dignified return of the victims in our pursuit of truth and justice. As we reflect on the immeasurable loss suffered by the families around the world, we are not only outraged at the attack itself, we are horrified and enraged by what has happened , by the clear intention of some to obstruct an investigation. Even after adopting this resolution, it is worth asking if there is really consensus this crime merit an immediate and impartial investigation why did we feel the need to meet today in order to demand one . We came together because that everyone has been supporting a real investigation into this crime. If they were, International Experts would have had unimpeded access to th
Decisions that often come out. That is a crude split. Justices do not line up in any particular way. Labels, ict on those dont think theyre particularly helpful in articulating anyone who is a judge, what their philosophy would be. It is not the goal of a judge to come into it with a preconceived vision. You are supposed to decide cases. That is how i would approach it. You have written that you were concerned with decisions that only looked to Prior Supreme Court opinions, statutes, regulations. You said that this kind of constitutional decisionmaking without looking to lot refuse, literature, treaties can be called cranach and technical cramped and technical. What role would lot reviews lot refuse having your judicial lot reviews law reviews having your judicial . I want to clarify on that comment. That writing with the blog post. It was making an early observation about opinions from a justice. I noted in that same post that there was also much to be said law approach. The certainly