Climate for Change

In 1974, a report titled, The Politics of Change in Local Government Report was released by the Institute for Local Self Government in Berkeley, California.  The purpose of the report was:

"... to begin tentatively to visualize the process of change, that is, the operant mechanisms to change events in local government.   We have concentrated on why change happens and how change is accomplished ..."

The reason for the project and the report began in 1954 when Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954 "authorized comprehensive planning assistance to state, areawide and local public agencies for solving planning problems...  The planning grants are designed to facilitate comprehensive planning for urban and rural development, including coordinated transportation systems, and to encourage local governments to establish and improve planning staffs and techniques on an areawide basis"1.   

The objective of the report was to define the politics involved in the consolidation and reorganization of government and more specifically, what causes change to occur.  It should be noted that while this report was produced in California and was directed at change in local government, it doesn't matter.  It applies to all levels of government and in fact, it applies to any bureaucratic organization - public or private.    

The following is from the Summary of Conclusions on Page 132 (163 pdf),  

Climate for Change

The conclusion was there must be a climate for change in order to restructure local government:

Factors for climate creation:

• A Collapse of government’s ability to provide needed services

• A Crisis of major magnitude

• A Catastrophe that has a physical effect on the community

• The Corruption of local officials

• The high Cost of government and the desire for a higher level of services


• Planning and contemplation
• Education and involvement
• Community
• Compromise
• Concern
• Cadence
• Cooperation
• Comprehension
• Concentration

A principal change agent as instigator

Recognition that government reform is a political campaign


Since the early 1990's when the whole Y2k propaganda campaign began, this country has experienced one crisis after another - and the not coincidental common element is that the solution is "reform" and lots more money for IT systems.  Even though the preliminary work of establishing the conditions for the redesign of government systems began in the 1980's when Reagan was in office, the formalized project to redesign - not just the systems of government, but government itself, began during the Clinton Administration with the Reinvention of Government project. 

The first government system that drew my attention was the project to modernize the IRS.  The first article in the newspaper was around 1994 or 1995.  The Contractor that was hired for the project was failing to perform as the contract was written.  That wasn't unusual because the major contracting firms always failed to perform and there were always contract extensions and renegotiations and a lot more money put on the table.  That was business as usual for these firms doing business with the government.  In about 1996 or 1997, there was another article about the project.  The government actually fired the Contractor.  That was MOST unusual.  My husband and I kind of laughed about it - thinking that the Contractor must have really screwed up the systems because they are rarely fired.  In Congressional hearings that followed over the course of the years, I stopped laughing when I discerned the pattern of re-engineering by crisis. 

Since that time... and especially after 9-11-2001, there have been so many congressional "crisis" hearings requiring more money for IT systems, I couldn't even begin to tell you about them.  They don't always use the specific words "IT Systems"  but if you know what to listen for, it's clearly the objective to supply more money and resources for re-engineering projects to overcome the crisis - whatever the crisis may be. 

Today, I listened to the Congressional hearing on the Phoenix VA appointment scheduling crisis.  This is the last straw.  It is so obviously an engineered crisis that even the most dim witted member of Congress and the most corrupt and rotten member of Congress should have their heads bowed in shame.  It's time to put a stop to this crisis gaming - and it is most definitely gaming - along with robbery from the public till. 

The first question I had after listening to the hearing was 'Who was managing the clinic?'   Here is what I found:

Her name is Sharon Helman and she is a 'change agent as instigator'. 

In a 2012 article announcing the hiring of Helman, we find the following:

After applying for her first VA health-care system job right out of high school, the 41-year-old quickly rose to hold directorships at veterans hospitals throughout the country. She most recently managed the Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital near Chicago, overseeing more than 480 inpatient beds and six outpatient clinics.

That means she was born in roughly 1971 and graduated high school around 1989.   

I had to go to the Internet Archive to retrieve her bio. It's quite  impressive bio for somebody who supposedly worked for 20 years for the VA and apparently earned multiple degrees while doing so.   

As a person who also went back to school as an adult while working full time, I call BS.  There isn't enough time in the day to earn the degrees she listed on her bio and they are the wrong degrees to be in the leadership at a health care facility anyway.  Notice the degrees listed on the current webpage of the Phoenix VA Health Care System:   U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs - Phoenix Leadership.  Those degrees are the norm.  Hospital Administration is a profession and a career path on its own.  For the amount of money she was being paid - a salary of $169,000 with a $8,500 bonus in 2013, there would be a line of qualified people around the block for the job she allegedly held.

What I'm getting at is that she is what I call a Pretender - which means she has credentials she didn't earn in the real world.  She may have obtained her degree based on a Life Experience Essay which would mean that she basically just bought them.     

Another article lists her Directorship experience at other VA health facilities in other locations.  Notice they are all one and two year assignments.   That's not the norm either.  From the content of the article, it's not hard to figure out they had to keep moving her because she is a human disrupter in the crisis game.  She is an insurgent aka Edge Runner.  Her purpose - when the time was right, was to be the crisis actress to take the fall so that Congress could have their crisis hearing and crisis reform - with a lot more money attached to it for their districts.  It's a game on the public with deadly consequences for some. 

The Edge Runner program was initiated by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and received the support from Donna Shalala, then Secretary of Health and Human Services.  There was a video with it that is not available from the Internet Archive but what Donna Shalala explained in the video is essentially, that the Edge Runner plays the part of the sheep dog - running at the edges to keep the sheep in line.  And the reason for was because of the redesign of the health care system which is what I was documenting when I found it.  For that research, I wrote a report titled, The Human Genome Project

The real reform that is needed in government is to put a stop to the game of management by crisis - which is really, terrorism.  Creating a crisis whether it be the Boston Marathon bombing incident - the crisis solution for which was more money for fusion centers, the episode at Walter Read, the 9-11 demolition of buildings followed by the anthrax attacks (CDC had an epidemic surveillance system ready to go live) matters not.  The way to stop the games is to stop rewarding them and start prosecuting people like Sharon Helman and going clear up the management chain at the VA because this game couldn't be run unless it was a management initiative.   And let's not forget Congress - because they ALL understand the game and they are playing it right along with the insurgents.       

Vicky Davis,
Computer Systems Analyst
June 29, 2014