Hearings to examine proposed budget estimates and justification for fiscal year 2027 for the

Good morning. The subcommittee will come to order. Mr. Secretary, we are really thankful that you're here today to discuss the fiscal year 2027 budget and fiscal year 2028 advance appropriations request for the Department of Veterans Affairs. I would also like to recognize the VA Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Richard Topping, who is here to provide the technical budget support if necessary. He's going to answer the really difficult questions. And it's not hard to understand why that might be necessary in the sense that the budget request is a total of $488.2 billion in fiscal year 2027 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, representing a 7.7 percent increase over fiscal year 2026 enacted levels. This includes $144.7 billion in discretionary funds, $337.7 billion in mandatory funds to include $54.6 billion for the toxic exposure fund and advance appropriations for fiscal year 2028. Landmark pieces of legislation like the PACT Act and the MISSION Act have reshaped access for veterans to healthcare. The creation of these programs has ensured more veterans are eligible to receive care and have access to the resources needed to exercise these earned benefits. This subcommittee has worked tirelessly to ensure that the department has the resources it needs to deliver world-class healthcare to those that have served. The budget request also includes significant investment in systems modernization to support veterans who use VA services and the dedicated workforce that is essential to providing a positive veterans experience. For instance, this year's budget request includes $4.2 billion, an $840 million increase to support the continued deployment acceleration of electronic medical record. The VA faced significant challenges during the early rollout stages. However, VA's current leadership has adapted and earlier this month delivered what seems to be a very successful rollout in Michigan. Secretary Collins, we look forward to an update on this program and hope we are on track to make health records boring again. Mr. Secretary, your RISE proposal would consolidate administrative functions in the Veterans Health Administration above the clinic level. This subcommittee is interested in an update on the proposal, the expected efficiencies you hope to gain, what risks the VA is evaluating as it considers the final proposal, and any budget implications. In addition to updates on those big picture items, we also look forward to hearing details about the department's request for mental health services, including efforts to prevent veteran suicide, initiatives to prevent veteran homelessness, resources dedicated to care for women veterans, and efforts to improve care for our rural veterans. I would be remiss to not publicly acknowledge the retirement of long-time clerk of this subcommittee. For a dozen years, Patrick Magnuson has worked tirelessly to ensure adequate funding for VA and military construction through some of the most challenging and dynamic years in our nation's history. Thank you, Patrick, and Godspeed in your retirement. [Applause.] I understand you got a bunch of medals last night. I'm surprised you're not wearing them. [Laughter.] We do appreciate your, appreciate all of your hard work. Before we hear from the Secretary, I want to advise the subcommittee that Secretary Collins has a family matter to attend to immediately after the hearing. He's been gracious enough to go ahead and come and testify regardless of this, but we will aim to finish no later than noon to allow him to catch his flight. With that, I'd like to recognize my colleague and friend and ranking member, Senator Ossoff, for any opening comments that he may have.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and a pleasure to be back here with you and I deeply appreciate how well we've worked together and our staffs have worked together on a bipartisan basis to advance the interests of America's veterans. And Mr. Secretary, welcome back. A pleasure to welcome back a fellow Georgian and please pass along my best to your family. And Mr. Topping, good to see you as well. So today we are examining the Department of Veterans Affairs fiscal year 2027 budget request. $488.2 billion for both mandatory and discretionary resources, a $34.9 billion increase over the 2026 enacted level. VA's request includes increases for mandatory and discretionary funding levels and increases for both healthcare and benefits. We also see significant increases in the electronic health record modernization account reflecting the department's intent to accelerate implementation in the coming years, as well as in the major and minor construction accounts. And you and I, Mr. Secretary, discussed those earlier this week. These are important investments. I look forward to hearing more about how you intend to use those funds to better serve America's veterans. Our shared priority on this subcommittee is to ensure the resources provided to the department are sufficient in their entirety, but also allocated appropriately across the VA system to best serve those veterans who deserve the best, as well as their families, caregivers, and survivors. And so while I'm pleased to see robust overall investments in care and services for veterans reflected in this request, I do have some concerns. Among them are the requests for clinical staffing levels. For example, it appears that the FY 27 request for physicians would employ fewer physicians than the FY 26 request for physicians. Likewise, it appears that the FY 27 request for registered nurses would employ fewer registered nurses than the FY 26 request. I hope we can get some clarity on the justification for those changes. We also see a very large 17.2 percent increase for outsourced privatized care in the medical community care account, while the direct care accounts increase by a combined total of just over 2 percent. And we see this imbalance continue in your advance appropriation request for 2028. Also want to note that this request does not appear to fund some specific programs, including childcare for veterans during their healthcare appointments, as well as healthcare for veterans living in the Compact of Free Association states, which have been passed by Congress. I'd like to better understand how the VA intends to implement those laws. Finally, VA intends to continue implementation of its major organizational effort that you and I have discussed, Mr. Topping, Restructure for Impact and Sustainability or RISE. And the subcommittee is seeking more information on how this funding request reflects the new staff reporting structures and the cost of this reorganization effort. We're looking for some more clarity and transparency on that front. You know, I want to come back to this point about the clear preference in the 27 and 28 advance requests for privatized care outside the VA. The department's own public-facing data shows that outcomes for veterans are either the same or better through direct VA care compared to privatized outside care. And we see growing demand for VA care, but we're not seeing here the request for the investments in clinical staff to reflect that. And again, we have this huge imbalance in the requested funding for outsourced privatized care versus direct care through the VA. So these are some things we're going to need to work through. And I think we all share the goal of supporting America's veterans, helping them to live healthy and fulfilling lives, honoring their service with the care and benefits that they've earned through their service. I look forward to the opportunity to engage with you both today and to your testimony. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Senator Ossoff. And Mr. Secretary, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's good to be with you. And Ranking Member, yes, as always, good, you know, at least to come home and say Go Dogs. And we can get that. And Patrick, thank you. I don't think there's a member of myself who served for eight years on this Hill, any member here, we're not here because we're the best and the best looking and best orators or anything else. It's because we have great staff. And Patrick, your service has been amazing and will be missed greatly, not just by this committee and by your chairman and the other staff members, but also by our veterans. And I do appreciate it. So I want to thank you again for that. You know, in light of all that's been going on this week, I just sort of had an English feel about me. Although I'm from North Georgia and more Irish than I am English, I think there's an interesting thing. When I started this job, I had a Dickens twist to it. It was sort of a tale of two departments, a tale of two cities. A tale of a department that I found and a tale of a department that is now. And I think this is the great story we're going to tell today. I agree with Senator Ossoff that there is a ways that we can look at and things that we need to make sure that we're taking care of our veterans. I agree with our chairman that as we put the resources where they need to be, this is why we have these hearings and good dialogue to make sure that we're doing what is best for those that I have served along with for many years and you have served in what you do in this role and in this committee. But one of the things that we had since taking office was have been all over this country. I've been in about 32 states. I've hit about 50 of our hospitals and more than that of our clinics and everything because I believe that the only way I could actually get a handle in managing this department was to get out from 810 Vermont and go actually hear from the people who actually run our places. One of my favorite questions is when I get to the hospitals and other places is what are we doing that's stupid? What are we doing that we shouldn't be doing that takes away from care and how do we apply it? One of the things that became very clear was my first statement to the department and it's still true today. President Trump under his leadership has increased our budgets both years that I have been in, but also in this time he said take care of veterans. And what we did first was is we put the veteran first at the VA. The mission is the veteran. It's not our organization. It's about who we take care of. For just a reminder for all that are listening and all that are watching here, we're the only retail agency really in the cabinet. If a veteran doesn't show up, we don't have a job. If the veteran doesn't come, I don't make policy for anybody else except what we do in our veteran healthcare and veteran benefits and veteran cemeteries. If a veteran doesn't come, we don't have a job. So our first and foremost responsibility should be the veteran. We expect every dollar to be appropriated to be spent wisely and built around those complete functions. I agree completely that we have had a situation in which we first came in, unfortunately it appeared the organization was more important than the veteran. And we saw that in how we were structured. We saw that in that's one of the reasons we'll discuss RISE today, we'll discuss other things. But I have to say the results are astounding. Even though we've had a lot of issues go on and we've had a lot of change in the first year that I have been here, a little over 14 months, just this week the Joint Committee, Joint Accreditation said we had 100 percent safety throughout every one of our facilities. No other hospital group can say that. We have that. That's all coming this year. Our CMS ratings are higher than most any other state's average. In fact, I would encourage you to look at your public and private hospitals, see their CMS rating and look at our CMS ratings. We consistently score above most every other hospital. And for those that are not, we now have a system set up to where I can actually challenge them to get better. These are the kind of things that we're doing. There's going to be a lot of discussion and very rightfully so about staffing. But there's one thing that you need to know and we've found this out over the last year. We did a study, looked at it from 2019 to 2025 and we had a 14 percent staffing increase across the board in our staffing among our hospitals. But yet we only had a 6 percent increase in actual patient interactions. So you had 14 percent hiring and only a 6 percent interaction. And actually you'll hear today we've actually had double-digit increases in staffing in certain facilities while we actually had negative patient interactions. So we're trying to balance that. I think Senator Ossoff is exactly right, making sure the resources go where they need to go and we're going to continue to look at that. Other things we're going to look at today and other things that I want to highlight is the things that are often not seen, but they are very powerful. In our VBA, I cannot say enough about our folks over there who've lowered the backlog from over 260,000 which was over 125 days the day I stepped in. This morning it is at 77,000 on the backlog. The average days to complete were over 138, they're now at 79 as of this morning. That is the great work of the men and women of the VA working in our VBA side and I'm very proud of them. And also by the way, before you say, quality has actually went up and higher level reviews are keeping more off of the board. It is a good news story all the way around. We've increased 2 million more hours than we never had before in our VA facilities. Why? Because we needed our younger veterans to know that they could come after work or before work or on weekends. We increased those. We made an emphasis on women's health, taking our women veterans, they do not have to go to their PACT doctor anymore to get obstetric and gynecological care. They can go straight to their OB-GYN now instead of having to go through their PACT doctor. These are the kind of changes we made. Some things that are still up there that I'm really looking at, suicide or death by suicide. Look, the numbers are way too high. I don't care what number you use, 17, 22, I personally think it's probably higher, 20 to 30 range and I've never acknowledged that, but one is too many and we're putting that money to good use. Very quickly, EHRM. You talk about a good news story. It was all that I heard before I was confirmed to this post. Health Records Management System, what's happening, what's it doing? In fact, the previous administration had basically just stopped because it had become such a problem. I promised during my confirmation within the first month we would address it. And I'm here to tell you today, not only did we address it, we had a rollout almost three weeks ago in Michigan that has been phenomenal. Even by industry standard, it has been phenomenal. It is working well. And I also have to just say this, wouldn't you know it, the one week we roll it out, on Wednesday of that week, we had a tornado hit one of our facilities. Senator Peters, I'm glad you're here. You ought to be smiling ear to ear. It is a great thing. We had a tornado hit one of our facilities, lost power, and we never lost a bit in a very new system. That is how well this is working right now. And two days later, they performed open heart surgery and it worked perfectly. EHRM, thank you to Dr. Lawrence, thank you to Neil Evans, thank you to our whole team. This has been a success and it started badly, I'll admit, but right now it's going ahead. Rise will talk about our construction, we'll talk about. But I'll end with this, and it's not a quote from me, it's a quote from one of your colleagues. In fact, one of my members of my other committee, he's actually the ranking member. Senator Blumenthal about a couple of weeks ago wrote a letter to the editor and it read like this. The editorial board asked are veterans better off for the investments we have made? The answer is a resounding yes. He goes on to say, today the Department of Veteran Affairs is providing more care and more benefits to more veterans than ever before. I could not, on many occasions I would not have to say that maybe Senator Blumenthal and I agree on everything, but I agree with his editorial. We are providing better care to more people and veterans than ever before and I look forward to this hearing.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. We're going to go to Chairwoman Collins and then go back to Senator Ossoff. You're recognized.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your leadership and all the members of this subcommittee. Mr. Secretary, welcome. The Togus VA Medical Center in Augusta, Maine, is the oldest VA facility in the country. It was established by Abraham Lincoln and this November will mark the 160th anniversary of the first veteran's admission to this historic facility. So we're very proud of this history and of my state's willingness repeatedly to step forward and serve. But we're also very aware of the challenges that come with operating an active medical center out of our nation's oldest VA facility. Last year, the VA itself identified $594 million in needed infrastructure improvements throughout the Maine system. Yet the budget request provides only $226 million for projects in Maine. I understand that the VA is in the process of reevaluating its future construction projects. When can we expect to see some of the projects that were previously identified as priorities reinstated?

Thank you, Senator. It's always good to be with you and especially the historic and we were just, I know up there just recently, our Under Secretary for Health was just up there examining. We are looking at it overall and making sure that we're putting that construction money. As you know, having that older facility, that is one of our concerns as we look across our whole spectrum. So we're reevaluating, getting the needs where it needs to go. And hopefully that is something we can do as we finish this budget and look ahead to the next one, we'll be making a reprioritization of that list and of course Maine definitely be a part of that reevaluation. Especially as we look at, as a reminder to all members, our average age of hospitals and in particular is between 60 and 70 years old. That's just unheard of in a healthcare system. So I agree with you, we'll continue to look at it.

And as I said, is somewhat older. Last week, and you mentioned the Assistant Secretary for Health being there, which we appreciated. I attended a celebration at the Togus VA Medical Center in Augusta, Maine, and I heard from a Navy veteran named Harry Hall who described his struggle with substance abuse. He had had to travel out of state just to get the care that he needed. Now, fortunately, there is a new residential treatment facility at Togus, so veterans like Harry will no longer have to travel far from their families, their towns, their support systems to get the care that they need. So this important opening of a new residential treatment program facility at Togus is great news. The problem is, do we have sufficient personnel to staff it? And that remains a real problem in the state of Maine, frankly for our hospitals all over the state and rural areas in particular, but for Togus as well. We need to hire the therapists, the doctors, the nurses, the other medical personnel to deliver care for facilities like this one. The Elizabeth Dole Act included a program that would allow the VA to issue waivers to go above the physician pay cap to support VA facilities that are struggling to fill critical positions. What are you doing on workforce issues?

Senator, I appreciate that concern. It is a concern. I appreciate one of the things that you said there and I think it's something for all the committee to understand and I know we'll talk about this more. We are the largest integrated healthcare system in the country, but we also are part of the healthcare system, okay, and we have the same struggles that are going on in not only recruitment, we're better in many areas and I'm sure there'll be more specifics as we talk about this and some areas are hard, harder in rural areas. The program that came out of the Dole Act, I'm going to be very honest, was a good band-aid to frankly a weeping hole. The problem was it was capped at 300 doctors. That's less than 1.5 percent of my doctors. So what was happening is, and we're implementing it now, it's going through now. But what was happening is, I don't know if y'all, at least my spouse, I have three kids and at Christmas she made sure that every kid had the same number of presents to open. And I was always fighting and said it doesn't matter, one kid could be a million dollars but she wanted the boxes. That's all she cared about. Here's the problem I'm having, I've had with this 300, which I appreciate greatly it was in there. But if I go to an area and I have to say I hire Senator Boozman and I use the incentive to get him in to work, but Senator Fischer over here was already working in the facility, they're going to be inequitable outcomes in pay. Our concern among our staff and our hospital and clinician staff was, and it's coming true in some ways, is where we're having to add, we're also running the risk of losing those that we can't bring up over 300 because we had to spread 300 positions over one and a half percent basically of our doctor force. So it was a great first step. There is some things I would love to talk to this committee about going forward and the authorizing committee to say let's take a certain number of ologists, if you would, I'll just use that as a broad term, and say on these five we raise the cap for all of them. And we'll bring you and Richard can give you the numbers, we'll bring the numbers. But that way I can treat all of them the same instead of having a disparity and an inequity set up with doctors with this 300. So I appreciate you bringing that up, it gave me a chance to explain it.

Thank you. My time is about to expire, so I will submit the rest of my questions for the record, but I do want to focus you again this year on the highly rural transportation grants. Maine is one of the most rural states in the nation and yet only one of our 16 counties qualifies for this program, Piscataquis County. And it's because the current rules limit eligibility to counties with fewer than seven people per square mile. And that's really kind of absurd. If you go to northern, western, eastern Maine, it is very rural and we have a high number of veterans in throughout our state. So I have a bipartisan bill that would expand the eligibility. It's clear the Veterans Affairs Committee with the VA feedback incorporated and I would just end by asking you to take a look at that, I hope you would endorse it.

I don't see any problem I would. I come from Georgia and as the ranking member knows, you can come to my hometown and you go a little bit out, it's hard to get around. And so yes, this is a concern. And one of the things if you don't mind, I apologize for answering this over the time, but one of the things we're having is we're having to view this in a completely different scope because we are losing as time and age gets for a lot of our volunteers who were drivers with DAV who has been such a great partner forever. We're losing that pool of drivers and I'm trying to do everything we can to get them in quicker. So I look forward to working with you on that.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Senator Ossoff.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, you and I discussed this earlier this week. I was pleased to see that your budget request includes more robust investment in construction than we've seen in recent years and I know this has been a priority for you. It's a shared priority for both of us. You've requested more than $10 billion in funding for major and minor construction and non-recurring maintenance. Can you share a bit more about your vision for the use of these funds?

Thank you, Senator, I would love to. And I think Richard may have some itemized numbers that we're looking at because we're looking at not only medical center adaptation, but the biggest part for us is in the major and minor construction on the reoccurring maintenance issue. This is something that actually helps our hospitals even further and we're looking at those would all incorporate especially our OR expansions in many of our facilities so we can use robotics. We're one of the leading research we do those, but our some of our facilities just the ORs are not built for what we need to be able to do there. We're looking at expanding not only CLCs, we're also expanding residential treatments that are coming up. These are the kind of things that we're looking at moving forward. There are a couple of major projects in there in the budget, Indianapolis, also looking at New Hampshire as well, and then also the beginning stages of San Antonio. So those are the kind of things, but I will say that we're looking at to make sure that we're expanding where we need to. This is the other thing that I've tried to do with the VA is we have a large number of facilities across the country. Some are in different stages of how many patients they're treating and how they're growing. And I think that's one of the things too for our construction to make sure they're growing in the ways that they need to. I'm happy to yield back.

Yeah, thank you. And looking forward to working with you to ensure that the facilities that need to be built are built and the facilities that need to be upgraded are upgraded efficiently and rapidly and to the highest standard. It brings me to a concern I have, which is the potential closure of clinics. There are media reports, maybe you can provide some clarity, but reports just this month that the VA has informed veterans of the impending closure or scaling back of services at VA clinics in Tennessee, New York, Maine, and Arkansas. Our fiscal year 2026 appropriations law continued to include long-standing language prohibiting closure of any VA facilities without analysis having been provided to the committee on the impact of those closures on veterans. Can you please provide the committee with some clarity on your intentions with respect to these clinics in Tennessee, New York, Maine, and Arkansas and confirm as well that you'll comply with the law requiring such analysis to be provided to this committee before there are any closures?

Senator, I'll be happy to because this is also something that's been going on for years that frankly was... I'm just going to be... the one thing you're going to find out about me is I'm brutally honest. I had the VA... one of the reasons we did RISE was because our hospital directors said they couldn't order X or do X without higher approval. And then we come to find out that they were many times doing these assessments and looking at their on a regional level without really informing, you know, and getting I think a lot of input especially from my office and others. We've changed that and we said no, in fact I have put a stop to any of these right now unless they are coming through my office or others because I want to make sure to not only comply with the law, we feel like we are by the way in this, VHA feels like they are. But let me also explain something about this.

I'm sorry, Mr. Secretary, forgive me, just seeking some and I don't mean to cut you off, I just want clarity on whether or not in fact you intend to close or scale back services at these clinics in Tennessee, New York, Maine, and Arkansas.

We... that is the intention on those and they were contract clinics especially the McMinnville in Tennessee, the Schenectady as well, and let me tell you why. Because I think when you see why, you will agree. At the McMinnville facility, which was a contract clinic, they were not living up to their contract. Schenectady, not living up to their contract for years. Our veterans were going in and being handed off, handed off, handed off, new doctors coming in all the time, there was no continuity of care. A lot of times the doctors wasn't showing up, we were having to then schedule them in other places. This was happening in Tennessee, Schenectady, and others. This is a problem. So I think the issue here is not are we closing a clinic, I'm not going to let a veteran step into a clinic that is getting care that they should not be getting. So for me that's a... it doesn't matter if you keep it open or not, I'm not going to put a veteran where they're not getting good care.

Will you ensure to comply with the law that requires analysis to be provided to this committee on the impact of such closures prior to such closures?

I'll be happy to work with you and this committee and follow the law as we've said. The VHA at this point feels that they have, we feel that we have, but I'll be happy to give you even more because I think when you realize especially this...

We have not received that analysis, so we need that analysis. And do you have any intention to close or reduce services at any clinical facilities in Georgia at this time?

Not at this point that I believe, but also let me just say something about closure and I think this needs to be said. When we talk about closing like the McMinnville facility, these veterans were already being accounted for in VA facilities close by, they were never losing their contact of care, their continuity of care was kept intact. Schenectady the same way, others that we have looked at, they're always being moved to either closer VA facilities or other clinics that are in the area. No one is being left in a quote closure, and I really would like to term the closure relocation instead of closure because they're not being left without care. Closure implies that there's all of a sudden nobody going to be there for them. That's not true. They are going to have what they need, they just do it at another facility.

Well, Mr. Secretary, that analysis is precisely what it's required by law to be conveyed to the committee, so I would suggest that you and your team send that to us as soon as possible. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Senator Hoeven.

Mr. Chair, I would certainly defer to you for your very insightful and important question.

I've been looking forward to your question.

All right. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here and also to Assistant Secretary Topping, thank you for being here as well. I also want to just commend you, I mean you hit the go button from day one at Veterans Affairs and it's noticed and not just by me but my colleagues as well on both sides of the aisle. And we appreciate it and it's through your good work but also really good work by folks on your staff as you mentioned at the outset and I certainly want to commend Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs Sam Brown, he's been a just a real champion, hit the ground running and not only works really hard but obviously he cares and is fired up about doing everything he can for his fellow veterans. And also Colonel John Louder, and I don't say that just because he's a Marine as my father was a Marine, but he's been a tremendous help to us and you guys have been great and I particularly want to thank you for the work on the Fargo National Veterans Cemetery. You guys have just been champs and it's going to be pretty fantastic and I hope we can get you out there towards the end of the year because we'll have a real nice dedication. I think you'll be appreciative and of course that serves not only North Dakota but western Minnesota and South Dakota as well, so really the tri-state and so it's a big deal and we appreciate it. And along that note, I would like to ask you how can this just because I have been so impressed with what the National Cemetery Administration has done, what can we do to help you support do more, how can this committee do more to support the National Cemetery Administration and your work?

administration is done. What can we do to help you support do more how can this committee do more to support the National Cemetery Administration and your work?

Senator, I appreciate that so much. I do before I answer your question, I do want to go back, I try to be very respectful of time, I've been on both sides of this dais. Senator Ossoff, I also wanted to say also we've opened 34 new facilities this past year as well, so I just wanted to add that in on the closure part and I appreciate it.

And I just want to be clear that what the subcommittee needs is the analysis on the impact on veterans of these closures because that analysis is required in the statute.

Not a problem. And we appreciate it. But I think you brought up NCA.

I think that's a great example of how why you're doing a great job, you're responsive to both sides of the aisle on the issues that I think that's a great example of what I'm talking about and I appreciate it.

I appreciate you so much bringing NCA up. I am I truly say this and I don't mean this in any way except honest, I feel like I have the best cabinet position in the whole government. Number one, I get to take care of the best people. I get to take care of a lot of things that we get to do to take care of veterans like myself and others who serve. I have VHA, which everybody knows about. I mean that's the one that everybody talks about. VBA, that's all disability claims, everybody talks about their claims backlog. And then there's NCA. And we put Sam Brown in there as Under Secretary. Sam is an amazing individual. His life story is amazing, but he cares so much about those that are coming to our cemeteries, taking care of those. They have a motto within NCA that says they have one chance to get it right. And when I first heard that, I said that should be the whole motto of the entire VA. We have one chance to get it right. And they have done such a great job. How you can help us, last year this committee and the Congress actually expanded the access for our grants program, which we work with states, and it was expanded up to where we could actually clear a lot of the backlog out. We're at 60 million, I believe, Richard, is that not true? In that for this year. That is going to be well used. Any extra help there would be great because our population is aging, we do have more needs and some of our cemeteries are filling up in that regard. And also working with your states to identify areas in which we can partnership just like we did in North Dakota, I think is a great way that y'all can help.

So how about in the funding area? How are we doing in the funding area there for...

Senator, additional ask would be there's been a lot of talk this morning about construction, CLC beds in Maine, for example, where we might be downsizing clinics that are underperforming, but then also too we've got $4.3 billion in requested major construction for those facilities, a billion dollars on these other facilities, largely projects that are ongoing, and a $500 million request to expand national cemeteries in four different places. So we'd appreciate that support. We've also got great partnerships with our state-level agencies where we do the grants for the state-funded cemeteries as well too. We'd ask we've got a big construction ask in this budget, $10.4 billion. That includes $5 billion in deferred maintenance at our medical facilities. We'd ask for the support, but that includes the expansion of those four national cemeteries.

The other area I want to touch just on for just a minute is access to long-term care. Only about 20 percent of the nursing homes in our state, and I don't think that's too far off the national average, take VA reimbursement for nursing home for a veteran. And of course that makes a big difference because if they have to go on CMS, Medicaid, then of course they have to dissipate all their assets first. And so we do have a veterans home in the southeast part of the state, but in the northwest part of the state we don't and obviously you're talking long distances, we don't have nursing homes to take these folks and we are now working with the VA on an assessment and to to look at another veterans home in that part of the state. And want to make sure that you're we have your obviously through this committee funds that thing, we'll go through all the proper processes, we've embarked on the the study that's required, the needs assessment, but would want your help and support.

I agree and I think you know Richard laid out a great deal of the moneys where we're at, but I think this is also a bipartisan issue, our aging population is going to need this. One of the things that I'm working on right now and I'm not happy about and we're trying to fix work through this is one of the reasons your nursing homes don't take VA patients is because we require a double inspection process, which is and you know I've already said what do we do that's stupid, well congratulations, there you found one. We don't we've got to get away from that, I'm working to getting away from that and that way we can ensure veterans are getting care, we're not we're not lowering standards, but we're going to the national standards that everybody else uses instead of us. We have the same problem in construction, we took national building code and VA just decided to add a whole another building code on top of it, which cost makes our costs go astronomically high. So we'll continue to work with you on that.

That's right on and I think you can have a real impact. So thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Senator from Wisconsin.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Secretary, for your service. In 2025, my legislation to create a grant program to improve outreach to veterans through county and tribal veterans service officers was passed into law as section 302 of the Dole Act. Congress appropriated $2 million for that grant program last year and the VA is currently going through a rulemaking process to distribute that funding. It is my expectation that the VA will complete that process as quickly as possible so that these funds can be distributed. The fiscal year 2027 budget request says that the VA intends to execute the full $10 million authorized for the grant program by law next year. So, Mr. Secretary, if the Office of Military to Civilian Readiness, which will administer this grant program, receives its full appropriation for fiscal year 2027, do you commit to distributing the $10 million in grants that are authorized that year?

Senator, of course. I mean again, one of the things I've always made it clear is we will work to do whatever, you know, is appropriated to us and also law to us.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And what do you think the benefit is of veterans receiving outreach from their county and tribal veteran service officers?

A brutally honest statement? It could be the matter of life or death. And I mean that, I'm not trying to be dramatic here about that. It's just a simple fact that the transition periods are some of our highest issues when we have those who are struggling, death by suicide. I had this just the other day I was talking about this and you know I've been a reservist all my career but I've deployed, I've been to Iraq, I've been those and next month I'm actually retiring from the Air Force after 20-something years. And somebody asked me about it and I had never put it in the perspective of like you've been talking about here that transition because for me it's sort of been a civilian-military transition. And I was leaving last December from Warner Robins Air Force Base and I walked out and I'm getting in my car to leave because I was having to get my last points. A senior master sergeant came up and of course as any good enlisted, saluted a colonel to she saluted, I saluted back, I took a step away and it hit me. And I turned around I had one of my coins, I took it back and I gave her one of my coins and I said you have no idea why I'm giving you this. I said but you just gave me the last salute I'll ever have in uniform in a in an active role. And it hit me that in just a few weeks I'm not going to actually say I'm a member of the Air Force anymore. Multiply that by a million those who are coming off active duty who have had, you know, other deployments who have been 25, 30 years. That's why I say this is so important. I value greatly our county officers, would love to see it expanded into more states.

I thank you so much. And county veteran service officers, as you've just noted, are a vital part of making sure that veterans know about the resources and have the resources that they need after leaving the military. They are responsible for processing more than $85 billion in compensation pension, healthcare claims each year, and are often the first way that a veteran becomes aware of the potential benefits that they are due. I was also pleased to see that the VA's fiscal year 2027 budget request includes consistent funding for Jason's Law. We talked about that last year. And not just Jason's Law, but other VA programs dedicated to ensuring medications like opioids are being properly prescribed and veterans can have their pain safely managed. But this money is only effective if you have the staff in place to implement the programs. And as we know, the VA lost tens of thousands of employees in the first year of this administration. How many staff responsible for implementing pain and opioid management programs left the department last year? And do you intend to hire replacements for them?

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement at all because I think in almost every state that's represented up here has a strong independent pharmacy network. Senator, the second answer is easy. Yes, we will hire every need that we have in the department. There's no hiring freeze. In fact, the new RISE setup is actually setup to where our hospitals have the complete autonomy to hire where they need and what they need going forward. And so we'll continue to do that. To get you an exact number, I'm unless Richard has one, I'm not going to give you one off the cuff, so I will get you that number as we go forward.

We can do that in follow-up. I just want to just drill a little bit further on that on your answer. The VA also announced at the beginning of this year that it would be eliminating approximately 30,000 unfilled positions, including direct medical positions like doctors and nurses. But many of these positions were filled until last year. So are you eliminating any unfilled positions on pain management teams and any other position responsible for opioid safety?

I will get you that direct answer, but I'll answer your overall question is what you had is about 26,000, by the way, that came off of our manpower document. You have to understand that when I first came in last year, I talked about a tale of two departments. I didn't have a manpower document. I had no, we were hiring at the VA based on possibilities and needs, not on actual assessments, not on are we needing it. And yes, some of those that were in the new manning documents in some facilities, say they had a doctor in December, but that doesn't mean we needed that doctor in January. So if that doctor left, nobody was fired, nobody was let go, there was no force reduction in that, it was a manpower document manning statement. And as I told Senator Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz, we had a long conversation about this, I said, one of the things you have to understand, and I'm going to use an example, let's say there was a position that was eliminated, a podiatrist, okay? You had three podiatrists, we didn't need a fourth one, the fourth one retired, and it was just a move from their manning document. If that executive director says, okay, I've just had an influx of veteran with bad feet, they can go hire that fourth doctor. It doesn't permanently take it away, it doesn't mean they can't have them, it's just simply a way that we can assess where we need because here's a situation, I've got a...

I'm out of time and so, but I'll look forward to getting those numbers from you as follow-up. And I don't have time for my final question, I will submit it to the record, but I'm going to be seeking your commitment to following all court orders and injunctions related to restoring and upholding VA employee collective bargaining agreements. So I'll submit that question for the record and look forward to your response on that.

We already are and I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Senator Rounds.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Collins, first of all, I want to personally thank you for the amount of attention that you've provided to our concern about the condition of the VA Medical Center at Hot Springs and the fact that at one point here just recently, we were looking at actually losing our dialysis unit there that serves both veterans and civilians in the southwestern South Dakota. I know that you've already committed $1 million to reinstate that and looks like we're hopefully still on line for opening up on June 1st or in June of this year. Thank you for that commitment. I just want to share with you, I just talked to a daughter of an 85-year-old who lives there in that region who had been receiving services there at Hot Springs who is now driving back and forth to Rapid City to receive dialysis and is really looking forward to once again receiving those services. So I want to thank you for that commitment that you've made and I presume we're still on target for hitting that time in June.

As far as I know, everything is still on target. And that's a great partnership because in that part of the world, it goes to something that our like our new CCN contract, which is the new community care contract and others, and also our placement of facilities is helping us not only with our rural outreach but also other the private and public sectors as well.

Thank you. You've even with the fact that the budget right now is up about 7.7 percent or about $34 almost $35 billion, you've defended some cancelled contracts as a source of savings and efficiency. Would you identify the major cancelled contracts, the services that they supported, the amount saved and the evidence that those functions are still being performed adequately without harming veterans?

Senator, we've taken a very measured approach to the so we understand the background of this, initial claims 76,000 contracts reviewed, potential contract terminations. We've taken a very measured approach. We have gone back and we've looked at those. We provided a briefing I think about a month ago, myself and our head of procurement where we came in and the total contract eliminations were contracts that were redundancies or doubles in some cases triples, but it's a matter of hundreds of contracts and contracts that were descoped, and ultimately a savings of wasn't billions of dollars but in the tens of millions. We were very careful that it would be veteran safety, patient safety first, facility safety first. As the budget reflects, we're making the investments in the agency as we go forward and in our infrastructure and in our workforce to ensure that that patient safety and veteran care don't lack. And even on things like dialysis, speaking of that, you know, talking about that in that region too, we're working on our direct care system as well too, but also, you know, VA spent $355 million investing in community providers in your state last year to ensure veterans receive that care.

Thank you. And I want to lead in another Mr. Chairman or Mr. Secretary. In South Dakota, we have been dealing and it's an ongoing challenge we've had with with postal service within our state and quite frankly, it sucks. And because of that, we've had veterans that have not received notification of of appointments in a timely fashion. We've had in some cases veterans that can't get their prescription drugs in time from when they request them to the time that it's actually received in the mail. I wish I could say that that was not the case, but the postal service has got a problem in our state. Veterans are suffering because of it. You and I talked the other day on the phone about this. Can you share a little bit about what the other options I think our veterans at some stage of the game, either through community care or otherwise, should have access to their local independent pharmacies to get those prescriptions. I think you may feel the same way. Can you talk about that a little bit please?

Yeah, I don't necessarily disagree with that statement at all. Because look, I have I think in almost every every state that's represented up here has a strong independent pharmacy network, they have a strong, you know, care that they could actually get and some of those pharmacists are some of the most devoted community leaders that we have. And there are a couple of things we can look at from that perspective because look, it's not just your state. I had a letter, a literally a first-class letter sent from five miles from my house from my sister-in-law to my wife and it took seven days to get there. Okay? This is a problem. So one of the things we can look at is is allowing refills to be done quicker and so to allow unfortunately allow for this lag time if need be. We're also looking at the policies on how we can then work maybe with community pharmacists or other pharmacy outlets that we can do this. I'm one of the things you'll always find from me is I'm going to start off with I don't know maybe let's get it. I'm not going to start off with no. I'm going to start off with how can we possibly make this work if it works for the most only only metric I have and is does it help a veteran.

Mr. Secretary, you would make a world difference for a lot of veterans out there that wonder whether or not they're going to get those prescriptions on a timely basis. And they would also love to have the professional expertise of a local pharmacist available to them as well. And so I appreciate that and I look forward to working with you. Just wish you could help us with that mail service as well, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Hyde-Smith.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I am delighted to be on this subcommittee because it is so critically important. And I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being that person that stepped up and taking this position because you are really doing a good job and your heart is right there and that I appreciate. You know, across Mississippi we have 180,000 veterans in Mississippi and so many of them live in rural areas and they deserve the quality care and access to that care. And I want to thank you for the department and your support for the infrastructure projects for the Mississippi Veterans Home in Pearl, Mississippi. And you know, it was just it's very needed and very much appreciated. I applaud the record investments that the VA is making to modernize, to repair and upgrade health facilities nationwide and I certainly thank you for the projects in my state in Biloxi and the G.V. Sonny Montgomery Medical Center in Mississippi this year. This funding is truly a step in the right direction to address the backlog that we've always had in the infrastructure that the VA faces. The question is what are the next steps the VA is looking at to address the backlog issue and how can we ensure that rural VA clinics are also being prioritized to receive funding?

Senator, I again, I love the work that's being done in Mississippi. There's a great collaboration between the state and the VA down there and we've seen that played out. It is amazing. I have more former governors from Mississippi call me about projects in Mississippi for veterans almost than any other state in the country. I think this is a twofold and this is when we hit backlog let's talk about two things. Number one, since last year through our opening up more appointments, opening up better scheduling and stuff from a backlog perspective for our and also fully utilizing our community care networks, which is how much did we do in Mississippi last year?

$855 million invested in community hospitals, providers, and clinicians.

And over the top and that's over the top of all the the direct care that's provided there as well. So one of the things is we've gotten more people in, they got more appointments, we're able to see more folks. So our backlog we're going to continue to make sure that our wait times those are in line with the rest of community but also never an issue of quality. And we'll fulfill the law on wait times but quality is always our metric. Then the other part is is the backlog. I wish Senator Baldwin was still here because she made a great point about the the county advisors, our county VSO advisors which help do the backlog. Two things. One, I shared earlier today how about where the backlog was but I got an even better one for you and for those that have been on this committee for a long time. One of the things that I found that was I say stupid was is that our application for veterans to apply for disability benefits was 18 pages and had all these legal jargon at the end. I use the standard of my dad or I use it as a standard of others. He would never fill that out. He'd think that he'd have to he'd get scared, either wouldn't fill it out or think he has to go get help. Nobody should have to pay anybody or do anything to get their veterans benefit claim started. So what did we do? I instructed Margarita Devlin who has done a great job at VBA to say shrink this application. We're in the final stages of this, Chairman, Ranking Member, this is a this is something cool. We're in these final stages, hopefully going to get VSO look at, make sure we got this down. That application hopefully by July 4th-ish we're looking at will be three to four pages. That's it. So they will be able to get their application in, get their time done. And then there's one more that's very specific to this and I want to emphasize this. We have a large contingency of issues or growing issues in our military, especially those getting out, of what is known as MST, military sexual trauma, both men and women. Our I it has been brought to my attention by many of those who have applied and had to and were dealing with this is that the way our application and the way our discussion of this is set up that they were having to fill out their traumatic experience more than one time. And that is wrong. We can get what we need mainly through the one. And so I'm also looking to how we can shrink what they have to take was one of the worst experiences of their life and not have to relive it simply to get the benefits that they have earned. So those are all areas that we're looking to work on and focus on as we go forward and it again it's all about a veteran.

Wow. The second one I want to shift gears and ask about the proposal the VA introduced in February to lower the disability ratings based on medication and treatment. I know you've gotten tons of calls on that as we have. But that raised concerns because many of the conditions are managed, not cured. Veterans are just still living with that in the long term and changes like this could affect our compensation, their compensation as you well know to access care. And so many of them don't even realize when they head down that path. But what was the department trying to accomplish and do you plan to revisit that proposal going forward?

I'll start that one off easy, make it clear and everybody can tape it. No, we're there's not going that is done, we removed it and it is off the books. Let me just take just a second here to explain this because this is very important. We had a case that came through the Ingram case. The Ingram case came out of our CAVC court that basically looked at the way we do a lot of our different examinations. Always at the for us at the VA the disability claim is based on the impairment. How does it affect the person? Okay, we've always went to that baseline. Okay, medications, other things have been always involved in that but it's always the baseline is what is the impairment. The court opened it up and said look, basically if you wanted to do this differently here's how you would do it. And so there was a discussion about a an IFR was set forth on this to say okay how do we adjust to what the court has said. The issue became though is that we're by the way Ingram was always being applied. What the court told us to do and in and in which was taken into you know not taken into account that was being applied all the time. When it got to the point of saying okay how do we you know look forward and fix this. Nobody let me just say a couple of things. Number one, no one who currently had disability benefits would have lost a single dime. No one. That was a unfortunate untruth that was put out there early on through social media and others. It was just a and I'm going to go as a South, it's a lie. Okay, no one was going to lose anything what they currently had. If anything it would have been they were talking about you know going forward with new claims. But we we said look. Also I want to show you there's a new VA. And for those who've been around the VA for a long time, we put it out in good faith thinking we were trying to help because here also the court said basically the courts were wanting my disability claims people to hypothetically determine what something would look like. I do not want 14 people across the country hypothetically determining how much benefits you would get on a different case. So you would get one claim, you would get one claim, you would get one claim, you would get one claim. Why? Because hypothetically they were having to make a judgment. That was one of the reasons behind it. So we just said no. The minute we put it out we got kickback. We got pushed back immediately. Most of it was on frankly not true, especially in the losing the benefit side. I recognized it immediately. Within 24 hours I suspended the rule. I said we're just going to suspend it, we're not doing it. It took me and I said let's see if we can fix this you know as far as make sure we remove it. It became even more evident there was no way that we could our what we were trying to do was ever going to to work. And I said so immediately by the next by within 72 hours roughly we immediately pulled the rule completely off the books, never to go back to it because it goes back again against my basic premises about a veteran. If my veterans didn't understand it, they didn't understand what we were trying to do and it was meant to help them, I was not going to put them through anything else. So that's why we pulled it. That is out, it's gone, it is done and we're continuing to focus on that as we go forward.

Great. Thank you for that answer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Gillibrand.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Collins, thank you for being here. The PACT Act has been hugely beneficial to veterans who may have been exposed to burn pits and other toxins that were released while during their war fighting. But I continue to hear concerns that many veterans are not being diagnosed with respiratory conditions, including cancers, until the disease has already significantly progressed. Is the VA aware of these concerns and are there any efforts to improve the screening regime for toxic exposed veterans?

Senator, that's a very important part for me because I am one of those under the PACT Act. I am a burn pit veteran. Yes, we'll we're making any adjustments that we need to over time and as we hear of needs and we're seeing from a calculus of what the doctors need, what the procedures are, we will always make changes to make sure that we can adequately address anything not only in the PACT Act but just a serious medical condition that they have.

What's the best way for patients to reach out to you or the VA or your team to express their concerns? Because they I've been hearing about them for a while and perhaps maybe the intake system isn't robust enough to take their concerns.

I think well at every one of our facilities we have a veteran advocate. We have advocates there in our hospitals that they could always reach out to. And frankly something that's never been done before, I have people reaching out directly on my social media and if they put something on our social media I actually have people monitoring my social media that says if they have a problem we actually average somewhere between 30 to 35 cases quote a week of people who just reach out through that way. Now that's not the preferred way but we're definitely we're helping more people in can so they reach out any way they can. They can go through their VSO, they can call your office which I believe for us is a mistake, that means we're not doing what we should be doing at the VA but we're happy anyway we can to help you.

So what I'd like to propose is I will submit some of these specific concerns directly to you via letter and then you'll have some specific examples to follow up on at least as a starting place and then you can assess what about the intake system's not working if there is some challenge.

Outstanding. In fact I'll even have I'll take it a step further, I'll have our office reach out to your office this afternoon and we'll start the process.

Great. We'll start there. Thank you. I'm also very concerned about the closure of the Schenectady VA clinic this August given that nearly 1,500 veterans in the region rely on that specific clinic. For the affected veterans this will mean they'll have to arrange transportation to their new place of care and to build relationships with new physicians and medical staff to care for them. What is the VA's plan to ensure continuity of care for veterans situated like this?

Well the biggest thing there is that right now the clinic at Schenectady was not fulfilling the needs that the VA standards are and that is actually taking care of patients in the way that they should be taken care of. They were getting passed around from doctors to the contract clinic which that was a contract clinic was not fulfilling for years was not fulfilling its requirements to have doctors, nurses available. They were cancelling appointments regularly, they were not fulfilling the the role. So really, Senator, my choice is when we look at this from our hospital perspective I will never and you have my word on this, I will not going to put a veteran into a facility that is not up to the standard of VA care. That clinic was not up to standard. So we're moving them to nearby facilities. They're not losing care, they're not having any issue. In fact we're actually giving them an opportunity to have better connectivity. Yes, changes is is different for everybody. Okay, but I cannot continue and I don't think you would want me to continue to have a clinic that consistently for years avoided the contract that they were under and not fulfilling the contract. This was not an overnight decision. This actually came in many years of looking at it and we're happy to provide more information on on that clinic but I'm not going to put veterans where they're not being taken care of.

So what is the plan for the continuity of care? So do you have a special individualized plan per veteran or are they just all being dumped in Albany? Like what is your plan for the continuity of care in this closure?

The VAMC at that point is they're reaching out and they have been reaching out to all the veterans who are being at that clinic and discerning where they would like to go. Again in their procedure.

So each each veteran's being called?

They're being reached out to individually, yes.

Phone called or emailed?

Yes. Is my understanding and we'll get you I'll have you I'll let you anything you need to know about this. I think for me the bigger issue is we are making contact with these veterans, they're not being left without care, but I cannot in good conscience send them to a clinic that for years has basically milked the federal government for money and not gave them the care.

I understand your concern about Schenectady. So my only request then is to continue to have that level of concern in getting them to the care that you have promised to get them to make sure they don't fall through the cracks, not ignored and actually get the care that they need. Because I expect you will see some challenges. Not only is there a significant drive time, these these are rural areas that people from probably a 50 mile radius come to use the Schenectady facility. If they now have to drive to Albany, they may be now driving two hours. So it's going to be a challenge because you you're losing a site that served 1,500 people.

I'm losing a site that was underperforming and not being what it was supposed to be.

Understood.

And I will never ever put that. So what look there's this may be an opportunity for us to take a real look at is there ability for us to put our own clinic there, not a contract clinic. That is something we look at. I you and I on the same page with this. I'm look I leave no veteran behind.

I would definitely definitely urge you to look at putting your own clinic there. Because status is relevant. I'm just trying to say in rural areas in rural America drive times are highly relevant with gas prices as high as they are. This could mean much more expense for them, much more stress for them because they're having to travel to another part of the state to get the care they need. So please if you are willing to do a different type of facility at the VA site that would be the best of both worlds.

Well we have best of both worlds not only with what we could possibly do as we look forward into the future how we could best help but also we have a community aspect there that we can make sure that they get anything that they need.

Senator, there is a care coordination and care continuity team inside VA that is that is looking at caring for those veterans, giving those veterans the opportunity to go to another VA facility, Albany if that's where they choose to go. But we are also spending last year alone $805 million inside New York so that those those veterans who want to stay local and use a local provider also have that access and that care is still coordinated with VA too. So we are ensuring there is no drop, there is no continuity of care and veterans have choice whether they want to stay in the local community or go to VA facility that might be further away.

And what then would your timing be, Mr. Secretary, if you do decide to do a your own run clinic at that site? What's the timeline for when you make that decision and what would your hope be?

I think we'll just have to look at this point in time I'm I'm never going to give you a number that I can't back up so at this point let me look into that as far as what we can do. We're just in the process of again I'm frustrated. I'm going to be blunt. I'm frustrated this took several years for this to happen. This should have happened frankly years ago. And so now I'm having to deal with it on on our watch after the facilities have been tried to make every possible way to help these veterans. So we'll I'll work with your office to work out a plan and we'll talk about what we're going to be doing.

I'd love that. And then Mr. Topping if I can follow up with you on if I have any veterans that are finding they aren't finding that continuity of care that I can follow up with both of you directly about where troubleshooting might need to take place.

Yes, ma'am. Absolutely.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think with Senator Hagerty's permission, Senator Fischer.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Secretary, I have a number of questions for you. I'm just going to make a statement, both Senator Hagerty and I need to get to other hearings and he is gracious enough to let me go first, so I thank you very much. First of all, I just really appreciate the call we had yesterday and I was glad to hear you talk about decluttering the construction process at the VA. And as you know, a proven tool that we have is that CHIP-IN for Vets Act that's out there. I was really proud to lead the original CHIP-IN Act in the Senate that enabled the Omaha community to work with the VA to construct a new ambulatory care center ahead of schedule and $34 million under budget. So I appreciate your commitment to me on that phone call yesterday that you will be engaging with the Omaha community on that to see whether CHIP-IN can be used again for that new VA medical center in Omaha. So I just want to thank you for that and appreciate your commitment.

I appreciate it. Thank you so much. CHIP-IN is a great program. In fact, we just finishing up the Tulsa facility, it was a CHIP-IN with Oklahoma State University. It's amazing. I think we need to do more of it.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator Hagerty.

Senator Hagerty.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome, Secretary. I'm going to try to go quickly as well for the same reasons that Senator Fischer mentioned, but I just want to thank you with your background, not only as a veteran, but as a member of Congress and now Secretary, the energy that you've brought to this is refreshing and I've enjoyed our many conversations. You know, in Tennessee we have 4,400 veterans that are being served and for too long, I think, many of the veterans have told me so many sad stories about waiting times and not being able to access the quality of care that they want, that they need. You've come in and you've put veterans first, you're refocusing the department, and you're actually making certain that the VA is working for them. I've been so pleased with your opening statement and the data that I've heard so far. I'd love for you to just give us a quick overview of how you've been able what are the key levers, I guess I should say, that have allowed you to come in in such a short time to improve the efficiency of the VA.

Thank you, Senator, and I appreciate our partnership that it goes back a number of years. It's very simple and it sounds it sounds almost too simple to be true, it was simply the fact of unleashing a bureaucratic agency to be the agency it's supposed to be. I mean, we were the I mean, if you looked up VA, all you saw was bureaucracy. You saw the a very much of a department that frankly, and I'm just be brutally honest, that it had been beat on for so long, and I mean that in the best and kindest way, they were told what they did wrong, they were told how many veterans they didn't see, they were told how many they, you know, backlog, they just got to be numb to the point of that they didn't think they could fight back. And I'm just not that way. I said, you are the largest, biggest integrated healthcare system in the country, we need to act like it. And so you put the veteran first, we gave them a focus. And I think that's one of the things that people don't understand about me and they they may disagree with me and we can always have gentle disagreement, but if we we had no focus at the VA. It was always about self-preservation, making sure the organization, how much many people, FTEs did we have, how much money did we have, instead of what was the outcomes. Nobody seemed to care about the outcome. We gave lip service to it, but we never put it toward it. So one of the things that we just simply did was is said, do your job. I went at this RISE program which we're now which is basically the senior leadership that was affecting, I found so many times I'd go into executive director's offices and they would say I'd ask them about a problem and I said, well did you ask for help, did you report it up? They said, yes, I sent it up to VISN, I sent it up to central office. I said, well what did you hear? They said, well we ain't heard anything. I said, when did you send it up? They said, a year ago. I said, this is ridiculous. So we have now taken that and one of the things is is by the RISE is for rural healthcare, for urban healthcare, we've taken our medical center operations and consolidated it into one so they have one central place to go to. We've taken our VISNs, reduced them to five so they can do the administrative, political side, the the work that needs to be done in a bigger vision, and then added HSAs, which are health service account or health service administrators who are now have smaller areas in which they will have five to six hospitals and that's all they will focus on. That's only job. So for some who are worried about rural healthcare, this is actually the best thing that ever happened to rural healthcare because those HSAs are now going to help our rural hospitals in those areas with the similar problems. So you don't have a VISN director who has Atlanta and Dublin and has to deal with these kind of things in a sense of a bigger and then you had they had Columbia and everywhere else. So for us it was just a matter of focus, it was a matter of doing what and unleashing the talent that was already there and taking the appropriations that this committee and Congress has given us and said, how do we spend this wisely with one purpose, the veteran.

As a business person, I certainly appreciate the focus and you mentioned the talent. I know that that skilled workforce is an increasingly challenging situation across America, but particularly in healthcare, and I'd love to hear you comment on how you're addressing the recruitment and the skill set, the skilling up of your workforce.

I appreciate it. We're actively recruiting on every in every aspect of what we do. We're hiring today if if there's somebody watching they're a doctor or nurse, come, I'll give you a job. But here's one of our issues that we had, it was also another problem. In many areas we were actually better, like my home state of Georgia, we're better than the average of recruitment, we're better than the average of others, but across the country we're in part of that healthcare system that you're very familiar with as well. Our problem was is where we're not as good is when we offered a job, we were taking way too long to hire the person. I mean, it was taking up to 130 days, 140 days. I actually had one facility that actually hiring for food service workers for 190 days. That's crazy. They've had six jobs by then. So what we did is is right now we're in a process of redoing hiring across VA total to where it will be between 30 and 40 days. We will have doctors hired, nurses hired, food service workers hired quicker than that. And here's what we did. We simply took a an approach of what is the rest of the world doing? What are we doing that was stupid? Well we were hiring, it was taking 20 days on credentialing, it was taking fingerprints almost a month. So what we said was, what do we have to do to get them a PIV card? How do we do what do we have to do to get them in the door? We'll do that upfront so we're making sure every, you know, all the security boxes are checked, all the credentialing boxes are checked, which is about five to seven days. And then we're going to get them in the door and they have to fill out the rest of it. Did you realize, Chairman, Ranking Member, all these folks, did you realize we were making human resources folks in our hospitals take an occupational health exam? I said, what for? To know how to open a file? To to type on a computer? That we were actually making nurses take an an exam to where they if they could pick up 50 pounds. I said, let me ask a question. Did they fill out an application? They said, yes. Did it say on that application, are you fit for the job that you are applying for? It does. And I said, did they sign it under penalty that they were not going to perjure themselves? Yes. I said, if a nurse is hired and can't pick up 50 pounds, we fire them. We don't hire them we don't keep them along. This was the problem. So hopefully we've already got eight pilots going now. Eight pilots across the country. We're going to hopefully expand it out by the end of the year to where average hiring will be 30 to 40 days in the VA. That will then help us with our recruitment and our retention and our bringing on new people.

Well, that's certainly common sense and I appreciate your sense of urgency. I'd just like to close with this. I appreciate the services that the VA offers in my home state. There's variability even in my state. And I look forward to continuing working with you. We've talked considerably about Memphis and and I'd like to continue to work with you on on improving VA services across the state with a particular focus on Memphis and I know we'll continue to work on that. Look forward to it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Peters.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member. Mr. Secretary, certainly thank you for your time this morning and as you mentioned in your opening statement, which I appreciated, Michigan has been home to the latest iteration of the electronic healthcare record modernization efforts with deployment in four locations across the state going live earlier this month as as you mentioned and the reports have been very positive from the folks in Michigan and I appreciate that. But I will say that I'm also cautiously optimistic that future rollouts are going to be just as successful as what we have seen so far. But I'm concerned the accelerated deployment schedule for record modernization may impact that and I want to ask you about that. The transition, as you know, isn't over yet and I want to make sure the folks in Michigan continue to have the support that they need to continue that. So my question for you is how are you ensuring that facilities have adequate clinical and IT staffing, sufficient training time, and onsite support to safely adopt the system without compromising patient care? So as personnel, for example in Michigan, as personnel who supported the Michigan rollout are now transitioning to Ohio for the next deployment, what steps are being taken to ensure that the facilities retain the staffing levels and the expertise they they need to continue to do what has been so far going very well, but as you know, it's not over till it's over.

It and also I just take the Senator, I am again, you talk about somebody being on pins and needles waiting for something to happen, that was one for us. Because again, it it was one of those things if you ever had a bad experience, you can't get the bad experience out of your head until that perception and that reality is changed. Well, I think we're in the first stages of changing the bad part of what happened in our EHRM rollout from previous to me and stopping and then coming into now. We're getting there. We've done 26,000 patients already in Michigan. I mean, we're it's going for we're going to be leaving behind all that we need to and and some of those are permanent positions now that are going to be in those facilities to keep that rolling. And that'll just go forward into Ohio into the as we look into this in Indianapolis is the progression all the way to Alaska actually is going to be in this rollout as well. How I know this is working and how people are getting comfortable is that I'm having center executive directors and employees at what is supposed to be next year's facilities hearing from their colleagues and they're saying, we're ready to go now. We we've been training, we've been doing this, we're we're ready to speed up our training, we're ready to do the things that we need to get happen. I'm not making this up, this is not coming from me, it's not coming from our central office, it's coming from the employees in these facilities. And so I can't say enough and I want them to hear this in this testimony today. The four facilities that have went live, I I commend them greatly. They took on what was told to them would be an impossible task because of past failures. They overcome past failures and not only raised the bar, they pushed the bar further. Your state is is getting us on our way to taking care of our veterans all across the country.

Great. Well, no, that's great to hear and thank you for saying that. I just want to make sure and I heard that in your comments that there's still additional the positions that are there necessary to continue that momentum are not going to be pulled out even though you have to roll some folks to continue to roll out in other states. So that's that's encouraging to hear. Secretary, the the VA Office of Inspector General released a report last summer indicating that every single medical center reported what they considered to be, quote, severe occupational shortage. The Ann Arbor healthcare system, for example, reported staffing shortages in key areas such as psychology and nursing assistants. The Battle Creek VA Medical Center reported shortages of psychiatry, family practice, and primary care providers as well as non-clinical roles such as police officers and custodial workers. The Saginaw VA clinic reported shortage in internal medicine, psychiatry, and geriatric providers as well as primary care providers and social workers. The Iron Mountain VA Medical Center reported shortages in anesthesiology, surgery, dermatology, psychiatry, psychology, and social work. And the John D. Dingell VA Medical Center in Detroit reported an even lengthier list of staffing shortages including nurses, social workers, dietitians, nutritionists, occupational and physical therapists, podiatrists, in addition to a whole bunch of non-clinical roles. So I put out these list and they're no they're by no means exhaustive, but they certainly demonstrate that the overall staffing shortages across Michigan facilities and in fact across Michigan, there are 76 occupations that have been identified as severe shortage, 76 occupations. Despite that, the clinical staffing has declined from fiscal year 2025 to today and your fiscal year 2027 budget leaves staffing below prior levels. So your staffing levels are going even lower while we're experiencing these huge shortages. So my question is how are veterans going to be better served by staffing levels that remain below last year's staffing levels when just last year your OIG found severe shortages? And I know there's recruitment and getting people on board, but the overall numbers you're also decreasing, which makes no sense given the problems that we're having right now and what I'm hearing back home in Michigan.

Well, number one, I think the issue let's just honestly address numbers as we go ahead. Ann Arbor in the last five years has had a 34 percent increase in FTE and they've had a 10 percent increase in veteran encounters. Battle Creek has had a 21 percent increase in FTE counts and a zero increase in veteran encounters. As you go through Detroit, 24 percent increase in FTE counts, 2 percent increase in veteran encounters. 32 percent at Saginaw and a 4 percent. So we've actually added those percentages more of FTEs into facilities that have had basically static or no growth in work. This is why what we have to do and look at our staffing numbers is they're always VA is just like any other healthcare system. There's not a hospital in Michigan that does not have shortages of doctors and nurses, there's not a one. We're all in the same ecosystem. We're doing better in many ways than others in some areas. We have to actually look at our staffing numbers and say where are we appropriately staffed and where are we not. So I would say that what you're seeing in in the four that we've just talked about is excellent work given by the staffing that is currently there and in the ways. When that report is looked at, it also looks at a at an ideal setting and not from a perspective of what we are trying to do with staffing. That's also an older report that came before I got there. Right now we're hiring every position that needs to be hired. There is no hiring shortage or no hiring freeze of anybody that needs to be. If they need the people, they can hire the people. So again, when I go to facilities and they say they need someone, my question is are you actively recruiting? And right now we are actively recruiting hundreds of people at every one of our hospitals and we will continue to do so.

Well, and I appreciate that and this is in no way saying anything negative on the people who are in those facilities. They're working very hard. In fact, they're working extra because they have to cover particularly certain occupations. It's in certain occupational areas, so it's not just FTEs, you have people, I get that. But it's what the report was is related to those occupational areas and certainly that's what we should be looking at. Understand some of these are hard to recruit for and hard to hire, so I understand that. But also you're taking down the numbers in the budget as well when I don't know where that comes from and I'm concerned let's try to figure out what that real number is then recruit to it because another key factor as you know very well, retention is the biggest thing and if people are overworked and overstressed, that's where they go somewhere else.

Well, I think the difference here and Senator, I would just, you know, again, we can use different languages in looking at that. I say I think the the levels of being autonomy in work and having the proper number there, I'm not going to say is overworked and overstressed. One of the issues that was talked about earlier today is the issue of doctor pay, especially in recruitment. And we talked about the Dole Act and the 300 that were applied to it. The 300 was a 1.5 percent of all of my doctors in the VA. It was pitting an inequity. I want to see and I would love to work with you and others on this committee to say let's look at our five or four or five top ologist problem or even RNs if we had to and raise that cap so that because and some may not understand this. You realize that some of the doctors that we're hiring, we're recruiting right now, I'm offering them $300,000 to $400,000 less than they can make in the open market. I mean, I'm sorry, they have to take care of their own family. They're not going to come to the VA if they can make $400,000 down the street. And we're seeing that a lot. And so this is something we need to work on. I'm willing to work with anybody on this. I am not opposed to putting proper staff where proper staff needs to be and we will always hire to what we need.

Great. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Senator Murkowski.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Secretary, thank you for what you've just shared with Senator Peters about about just how we pay our providers at the VA. It is something that we have had challenges in Alaska as we have in other areas in recruiting, particularly some of these specialists and it's just as you have outlined. They can go down the street and make so much more. So we want to make sure that our veterans get that care, but we also have to look at the at the pay scales as well. So I appreciate your commitment to that and making sure that we have the staffing that that we need and our veterans deserve. Just thank you for the call the other day and discussing some additional issues that we won't have time for this morning. I wanted to just share with you this relates to electronic health record and the modernization going on there. But we've heard from several members of the Alaska VSOs who utilize the joint DOD VA hospital there at JBER and and they continue to report difficulties transferring their health records between the treatment facilities there when they're trying to utilize different facilities available to them. So it's right there, they're connected, it should just be easier. And I know that we recognize it, but VA's going through their process, DOD's going through their own process in updating their medical record technology. But we just need to know that it's going to be better. So can you give me that assurance?

Yes, it's going to be better. I can point to Michigan. Okay, I can point. And here's the other thing, you're just going to get better by this fall because Anchorage is part of that. Here's the problem right now.

We're all a little nervous about it and we're looking to these other examples.

No need yeah look, I share your nervous. I'm like an expectant dad on all of this. I mean, I want it to happen. But the big thing is here is you got to understand in that joint facility right there, you have Ford and Chevy. Okay, you got one, the DOD's already done theirs. We've not got ours. We're still having a system, the VistA system, in which we're putting $750 million in every year just to keep it alive. Not improve it, just keep it alive. So they're talking again, it's Chevy and Ford talking. By the end of the year, my preference Ford and Ford are going to be talking.

Okay, I can't wait. I can't wait to see that. And and again, this is this is something that has been a long-standing frustration. We know it. And so to hear the the commitment that you're putting towards this effort to reconcile it for our veterans is really appreciated. On the on the reorganization itself, I'm encouraged that as I understand what what is happening here, we're going to see some of these these multiple layers of bureaucracy that have accumulated and really weigh down our our VA directors there, adding additional flexibility to those VA employees who who run the Alaska system. I think I'm hearing from our veterans that they are very satisfied with their care. VA employees consistently rank our facilities among the best places to work. So I attribute that to some good decisions that some of our directors have had in the past. And so when I think about the positive news coming out of Alaska, we kind of judge it on what's the complaint level that we're hearing and perhaps it gets all the way up to you. But overall, we have seen we have seen much better satisfaction, still some frustration when it comes to those veterans who are using the community care in having to wait for the VA to approve their referrals for additional care that the primary care provider deems necessary. So I know we're working through that. But can you can you share with me or guess I guess give me the assurance that our rural veterans as we look at this reorganization, we're not going to be leaving them behind.

No, in fact, one of the very reasons for RISE or our reorganization plan was the disparity between our rural and or the struggle, might not disparity, but our struggle between rural and urban, suburban care. Okay, and in the different they they all have different needs. And that's one of the reasons why in our new plan, there is an HSA dedicated only to Alaska. You will have it'll be the only one that has a singular focus and that's Alaska because of the unique needs. We're looking at then how we deal with our call center in Alaska so that people who get a call and say well you need to drive over to here and they say well I'm on an island, I can't drive there. I get it. Okay, so we're that's one of the reasons why we've actually looked at this in a big way. By the way, the number this is an interesting number because again, we have that mixed situation. You don't have a VAMSI there, so we have our direct care, but we have almost how much did we spend last year? $355 million. $355 million into the Alaskan healthcare system that helped us in addition to our direct care, which was in, you know, again, that's over and above our direct care, which we have at JBER and others. So for us, it's it's not a matter it's it's a matter of focus. The RISE organization helps us focus better on the different individual entities inside our hospitals and inside our collective bargaining. So when you get a collective group that are have similar interests, then they can all come together and say, hey, we have this need, we need to fix this, this is areas that we can share with as we go forward. So that I'm excited about this reorganization. It's about 25 years past due. And so I think we're good where we're at.

Well, I appreciate that and I just note to my colleagues, it's not that we're we're particularly needy in Alaska or aggressive in pushing our VA secretaries, but Alaska hosts the largest number of veterans per capita in in the country and we're very, very proud of that. But obtaining services can be challenging when you have 83 percent of your communities that aren't on a road. And how do you access a level of care? And this is why flexibility within systems has been greatly appreciated and and how we're communicating between systems. So, Mr. Secretary, just thank you for for your commitment. We're going to keep our fingers crossed on the fact that Ford is going to meet Ford and it's all going to work.

That is great. And also, you mentioned trust scores. Our trust scores right now, and this is among veterans, these are veterans rating veterans in the VA right now, is the highest it's ever been.

Thank you. I let my colleagues go first and so I'm really pleasantly not I'm really pleasantly pleased in the sense that we had great participation today and most of the questions that I was concerned about you've already answered very, very well. I will say that I'm really pleased with the results that we're getting in Michigan. It's a great start and especially to hear from our colleague in Michigan, you know, to back that up. The only thing I would say, it's not a bad you know, you mentioned having a bad experience and getting that in your mind and then it makes it difficult. In this case, it's bad experience, experiences and you're very, very familiar you've wrestled with this forever for many administrations. This is not a Democrat or Republican thing, this is many administrations over the past couple decades. So we really appreciate you taking that on and just it's so important and really will make us a lot more efficient. I want to change just a little bit, you know, many of us were involved in working with the legislation to establish the Staff Sergeant Parker Gordon Fox Suicide Prevention Program. According to the VA's December 2024 report, 22 percent of the veterans supported by this grant were new to VA services and 80 percent of veterans within the program have shown a decreased risk in suicide. This year's budget requests $111 million to extend the program along with an advance appropriation request of $114 million. Can you just take a second, Secretary Collins, and just talk about the importance of the program and what other current initiatives that we're doing that this is another thing that we worked so hard, you know, for so many years to to get a handle on to reverse some of the negative trends that we've seen.

Definitely. I want to take just a moment one, the Fox grants are are very important but one of the things that I saw in the Fox grants was I was concerned about accountability. There was not we were giving money to different groups but we really didn't we wasn't making them metrics what we needed to have. What gets measured gets done. So Rich is going to speak in just a second about that because it comes through his program but I also want to say that from a suicide the death by suicide issue with these Fox grants really go after and it's targeted toward those unreached. Remember, 60 percent of veterans who have death by suicide are not in the VA system. And we've just one of the things that we had a tool that we've had for over a year or longer than I'm before I got there that allowed us to actually text and email veterans that we were not connected with. We started using that full force at the end of the year and since January through now, we have averaged we've added over 125,000 new veterans that were not in the system just in this year through that. So I'll let Richard talk a little bit about that but it's accountability is our big issue there.

And Senator, the $727 million we're investing in that is just the first part. So suicide prevention is getting these veterans into our programs where we can care for them. We've got a $17.7 billion investment mental health to bring them in, a $644 million investment in mental health rehab. We're building facilities so we can bring these veterans in and get and keep them into care and meet their needs. So this is a holistic approach to make sure that from the time a veteran is in crisis to the time the veteran is stable, they are in the VA system and we've got the resources to do that.

No, I agree. Metrics are the key both with these outside groups and then again within the VA. And I know that that you're working hard to do that. Senator Ossoff has just a few things and then we're going to hopefully get you out of here early and

I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. It's been a long week.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just real quick, Mr. Secretary, something I think you're passionate about, obviously a key issue in Georgia and across the country. As we build this appropriations bill, will you just commit to working with me and the subcommittee to make sure that we are strengthening the foreclosure prevention and veteran homelessness prevention programs that I know are important to you, important to the VA, important to the folks back at home? We just were looking for a clear commitment from you on that.

We are and trying to find the right way to do that and I think that's the best way.

Okay, thank you. I appreciate that commitment. And you know, I don't think we have time to get into all the details here today. There's some information that I've requested with respect to the medical center in Augusta that I know you recently visited which has been struggling. Many of these issues, I want to make sure to be clear in the interest of fairness, predate your tenure. But I sent a letter earlier this year requesting some specific information about the management of that facility and have not yet received the detailed responses to that letter. Can you just commit to me to get that information to to the subcommittee as swiftly as you can assemble it?

I will be happy to do also I actually and Senator, I want to bring this up, I have actually sent you a letter as well because some of the comments that was also made locally and in the media and others indicated some problems at the Augusta Medical Center but did not have names attached, did not have and my job is is to fix problems, not talk about problems. So I will get you what information you need. If you would get me the information that you have on this supposed issues that they're I'll be happy to fix those. I'm not looking to for either one of us I think we share the commonality of let's fix the problem. But I will say this about Augusta because I do think it needs to get on the record. It is before me but since I've been there, I've been there twice in person in the last year. Once was unannounced, they didn't even know I was coming because it's just got a problem down there. And we've also fired people that were in that position. My first time going to Augusta was with Senator Isakson when we had the first scandal. So this has been a problem for something we need to work on for a long time. But I I want to I want if you would commit to me as well, if you have an issue of specifics at Augusta, please come to me. Don't don't have amorphous don't have amorphous issues of deaths or other things that we hear about in the media and then when we ask about it, you don't actually give us the information to fix it. I'll be happy to be transparent with you if you'll be transparent with me.

Mr. Secretary, these aren't amorphous claims in the media. Here are

But you've not gave me the specifics.

Excuse me, Mr. Secretary. You know, I I had not intended for there to be a public confrontation on this subject today but if you want to have one, we can have one. These are not amorphous claims in the media. The Inspector General and again, I was very clear in my question this predates your tenure, but statements from the Inspector General at the VA about hindered collaboration on patient safety efforts, about failures that limit the ability of the staff at the Augusta VA to track, trend, and address systems issues that affect patient safety, about refusals to consider subject matter expertise that contribute to low employee satisfaction and patient safety concerns. These predate your tenure but they're the VA Inspector General. And when my office, Mr. Secretary, hears from patients, the family members of patients, staff and providers at this facility about persistent failures with potentially life-threatening impacts and we know again through the work of the Inspector General that there is a quote, threatening and abusive communication style, retaliation for employees sharing concerns with leaders at this facility. I'm not about to come and identify those who are blowing the whistle at your request when we're trying to investigate what's going wrong at this facility. So here is all I need from you today. I asked a number of specific questions of the medical center leadership at this facility. We haven't received the answers to those questions. I believe you when you say you're working in good faith to improve outcomes here. I know you recently visited the facility but I need the answers to the questions that I've asked and not yet received. So I just need a yes or no answer. Will you provide that information to me and to the subcommittee?

I have always said I will provide the information. But Mr. Chairman, in all due respect, I would like I'll give him his yes-no answer. Yes, we're going to get the answer. But I need to explain. And this is you just mentioned two things and we put it out in public setting, so we'll do this. Threatening and abusive. You know that employee's fired? Has been fired for two years almost, a year and a half. That person is gone. I've had two leadership teams replaced during my tenure there. The things that were referenced in this OIG report which was by the way from September 24th through September 26th is a of 2024. I don't mind being held accountable for things that came before me. I will take all responsibility for what we're doing right now. And the and to put a and frankly, this is where it's just frustrating and and I look, you and I can have a great relationship. I want to. But when you put a website up asking for people to send you problems and then when there's an implication in the media from your office that there was a death in a facility that could have been negligent but yet we don't get the patient name, we don't get anything about it where I can fix it, that's a problem. And by the way, I have visited. I would encourage you to to actually go to the facility.

Mr. Secretary.

I will work with you on anything. I'm not finished. I didn't interrupt I didn't interrupt Mr. Chairman. I didn't interrupt I didn't interrupt him and I'm not finished.

Go ahead, Mr. Secretary.

All I'm trying to say is and I've got the OIG report on stuff that was closed out on a 2024 report. Let's sit down and talk about where we're at right now. And that's what we fixed. I've got I mean, I went down there. Did you realize okay, I'm just going to lay it out. I've never been a secretary to run from anything. That these people in Augusta, the workers in Augusta, didn't think it was worth fixing the hole in the roof and we lost a lot of equipment because they wouldn't fix the hole in the roof. We fired those people. We got rid of those people. I sent a new management team in there just in the last 60 days. Nobody's more upset about Augusta than me. It's my hometown. It's my home area.

No, I need to reclaim my time.

So I I appreciate but I don't I just appreciate the implication and this is where it came across and maybe I'm sensitive to it. I'll get you that. But I think you're being a little bit of grandstanding on it because I asked for information you didn't give me. In fact, when we gave it to the staff, the staff seemed offended that we would ask for that information from you.

Mr. Secretary, may I?

Go ahead. I'm through.

I opened this question by acknowledging that many of these issues predated your tenure in the interest of fairness. And then pointed out that there were a series of questions that I'd asked about the management of this facility where as you just noted, very serious issues persist and asked you for a commitment to provide that information to the subcommittee. That's the commitment that I seek. Now, when we have a facility that has a pattern, a clear pattern of retaliation and intimidation for folks who raise concerns within the facility and I recognize that many of these issues predate your tenure. I'm not hanging this around your neck, Mr. Secretary, and there's no need for you to be defensive about this. In that context, I'm not going to provide the names and identities of people who are blowing the whistle to this subcommittee and to my office at the request of the VA, particularly where there's communications just recently as a few months ago going out to providers at this facility telling them improperly in my view that they shouldn't suggest to their patients that they bring their concerns about the quality of care there to their elected representatives in Congress. So I want to be just very clear I want to be very clear about that's wrong. Here is

I mean, that's not I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying if that happened

Yes, it is wrong. And here's the email that went out to providers at the facility. Okay, so there is my point, Mr. Secretary, is not that you are to blame. My point and what began this entire thing is that we have a clear problem at this facility. The problem predates you. I believe you when you tell me that you're working to fix it. I'm also working to do my job to oversee these facilities and the VA. And there's information that I need and have requested that I have not received. I appreciate the commitment that you made at this hearing to provide that information to the subcommittee and to my staff.

I appreciate it, Senator. I appreciate this. I think honestly, and I think I've just seen it. You and I are in some ways are talking about two different issues. I have no desire to see a whistleblower. I don't get involved in that. If people want to complain about it, go right ahead. They can come to you. That's what you're there for.

Yeah, well...

But my problem was, and I think this is the issue, there was implications in the media, and I think you'll acknowledge this. There were implications in the media of a wrongful, negligent, or somehow probable death in that facility. Of which we just honestly ask if there was or there's some concerns about care in that facility. I don't care about the whistleblower. I don't care that they're upset at management. Most of them are upset at management because there was a bad situation there. That was only my concern. So we, I apologize. I'm going to step back. You and I both can step back. I was upset about one thing, you're upset about another. I get that. We will work together to resolve Augusta because Augusta should be the premier site in this country. You and I both agree on that. It's got a culture problem. That's why we've changed leadership twice down there. And the new leader down there is fighting and swimming in the sharks every day. So if you would like, in fact, if you and I would like to go together to visit the VA at Augusta, I'll be happy to go with you. And we can talk about this in any way you want to.

I appreciate that offer. Let's begin by please getting the requested information to the subcommittee and to my office. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

No, no, no. And this has been a good conversation. And certainly, you know, our staff is willing to jump in and do anything that we can. The nice thing about, you know, this is everybody working together for veterans.

I don't disagree, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate both you and the ranking member.

Augusta is always a nice place to visit.

I just wish I could get on the golf course down there to play badly, but that would be about it.

We'll let you get out of here. One thing that I'd like for you to clarify, there was mention of some sort of closure in Maine or...

I appreciate that, Chairman. There is no closures in Maine. None. There is no current or planned closures in Maine. And if that came across wrong, I take full responsibility.

No, no, no. That's great. We do appreciate you being here. Again, this has been a great hearing with lots of really good attendance. You understand how busy it is right now. I mean, it's just there's just a lot of stuff going on.

Yeah, I have a friend upstairs I think is getting a lot of attention right now.

But I think it really illustrates, you know, how important the entity is that you're running and, you know, how seriously members take it. So we look forward to working with you through the rest of the appropriations cycle. For members of the subcommittee, any questions for the record should be submitted to subcommittee staff no later than the close of business on Monday, May the 11th. And again, be sure and wish your family well for us. Thank you. This hearing is adjourned.