Is This Person a Fit Leader?

Some of you may have heard about the little to-do involving New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D), Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and a crack about CP time, which of course means Cautious Politician time.  The thing is textbook much ado about nothing, but that just emphasizes the failure of Clinton’s response to the flap:

Well, look, it was Mayor de Blasio’s skit.  He has addressed it, and I will really defer to him because it is something that he’s already talked about.

Yeah, just cut and run.  Do we really need such a one in the White House?

Continuing Veterans Administration Failure

Kyndra Rotunda, ex-Army JAG and currently Professor of Military & International Law and Executive Director of the Military and Veterans Law Institute at Chapman University, had some comments in her Wall Street Journal op-ed [emphasis in original].

When Congress enacted the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014 in the wake of revelations about bureaucratic dysfunction at the Veterans Affairs Department, the plan was to reduce wait times at VA hospitals, give veterans access to outside health care and allow the VA to quickly terminate problem employees.

How is the VA doing? For starters, government statistics show that hospital wait times are 50% longer than two years ago.

And

The law allows the firing of top-level VA officials with less notice and fewer appellate rights than government employees enjoy. The fired VA worker must appeal within seven days of the discipline; administrative judges must hear and decide the case within 21 days, or the department’s discipline stands; judges cannot mitigate penalties; and decisions are final.
…
Over the past month alone, judges at the Merit Systems Protection Board, which hears appeals by federal employees, sided with three VA officials who challenged their disciplining. The MSPB reinstated all three.

Time to get out the axe.

But then Rotunda strayed.

[W]hat’s the harm in allowing judges to mitigate penalties?

In response to which, I ask, “What’s the harm in requiring these administrative judges simply to uphold or set aside the penalty?”  Either the person did the deed, or he did not.  The penalty is not for a third party to decide; the employer—even this wholly mendacious VA of an employer—is the one to determine whether the person’s services are needed any further.

Full stop.

Veteranos Administratio delende est.

Do Your Own Work

Currently, per a 1996 law passed by Congress, the CDC is barred from using funds to “advocate or promote gun control.”  Now, some 100 or more medical organizations want Congress to lift this ban, so they can research “gun violence.”  The letter they’ve written to four Congressional committees making this request can be seen here, and it’s signed by the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, among those 100+.

These groups admit that the ban on using CDC funding to conduct this research does not ban the research, but they claim that the lack of government funding amounts to such a ban.

No.  This is just cynicism: if these guys actually thought the research they propose had any value, they’d go ahead and do it.  They’re just demanding OPM so they don’t have to make the hard choices of priority setting.

Elections have consequences.

Hillary Clinton’s Immunity?

Fox Business News‘ Julia Limitone thinks Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will talk to the FBI “within days.”  In fact, she’ll apparently be talking directly with FBI Director James Comey.  Here’s the money quote from Limitone’s piece, though:

While a proffer agreement will protect what Clinton says during the meeting from being used in a court of law, [former federal prosecutor-turned-criminal defense attorney, Arthur] Aidala noted it can be used against her for leads.

Just how far does this proffer agreement extend?  How immune to prosecution is Comey making his hopefully future capo di tutt’i capi?

A Telecon Transcript

A leaked phone call held by International Monetary Fund officials is exposing strains between Greece and its international creditors, highlighting the risk that the country’s bailout program could be headed for more drama this summer.

And from that phone call,

“Look, you Mrs Merkel you face a question, you have to think about what is more costly: to go ahead without the IMF…or to pick the debt relief that we think that Greece needs in order to keep us on board,” Mr [Director of the European Department of the IMF, Poul] Thomsen tells his colleagues, according to the Wikileaks transcript.

A couple of thoughts on this.  Were I Merkel, I’d have something like this to say to the IMF: “I don’t appreciate ultimatums, Mr Thomsen.  Your threat has made our pick for us.  We’re done here.”  I’m not sure she’s ready to cut the cord, though.

And: who leaked the transcript?  The IMF, to pressure Greece (rather than Germany)?  Germany, to prepare Europe and Greece for the IMF’s withdrawal from the bailout?  Greece, to pressure the IMF and/or Germany?