IndyStar

In the field, a military commander is often faced with the challenge of sticking to the plan or adapting it to meet unexpected enemy movements. The old adage is true: Any plan will almost certainly fail in the face of enemy contact without adaptation, innovation and flexibility. Good commanders, the ones who get things done, can look past the “perfect plan” to do what’s best for their soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. Sen. Bernie Sanders, when charged with oversight of the scandal-ridden Department of Veterans Affairs, had that chance and failed.

The news of delays, deception and denied care at VA hospitals was deeply disappointing to America’s veterans and front-page news across the country when it broke in 2014. Americans were outraged because we make a simple promise to the men and women who volunteer to wear the uniform: When you get back, we’ll have your back. But in 2014 it was increasingly clear that veterans were being denied care by a bureaucracy bereft of accountability and oversight. When the fudged books, first at a Phoenix VA hospital and then across the country, came to public light, quick leadership was necessary.

For the two years that Sanders chaired the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, his committee failed both to catch or to respond effectively to the problem. Both Sanders and his primary opponent, Secretary Hillary Clinton, are clear supporters of government-run health care for veterans, but when 18 different independent inspector general reports detailed the problems at the VA, Sanders failed to ensure that care was actually happening. When finally pressed on why he took so long to respond to the burgeoning scandal, Sanders told CNN that “we have worked on many, many issues.” In other words, the committee was doing other things. And when it became clear that dozens of veterans died while waiting for care at VA hospitals, Sanders said that we “have to put that all of that in the context of the size of the VA.”

Enterprising journalists revealed the scope and scale of a problem that Sanders’ oversight had failed to find. In response, the House of Representatives held 42 hearings on the problem. Even when accounting for the partisan zeal of House Republicans, the seven hearings Sanders held pale in comparison. Paul Rieckhoff, leader of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said, “For far too long he was apologizing for the VA. He was refusing to acknowledge the severity. He was positioning it as a smaller issue than it was while veterans were dying waiting for care.”

Rieckhoff’s stinging judgement is harsh indeed, in no small part because by all accounts Bernie Sanders does honestly care about veterans and their families — his passion for them is clear, commendable and oftentimes moving. But passion is no substitute for leadership and results.

Today, on the campaign trail and in debates, Sen. Sanders touts VA reforms and funding increases passed after the scandal as an achievement of his leadership. But it’s clear that Congress was spurred to act by the problem itself, not the senator who failed to see it for what it was. Reform legislation didn’t need Sanders’ vote to pass. Bernie Sanders has passion, principles and commitment, but he has demonstrated that those alone don’t get results. Political leadership, as with military leadership, is rarely a matter of pitting a perfect solution against an obviously bad alternative. Governing requires the ability to believe strongly in a principle while acknowledging that the world is an imperfect place requiring compromise, collaboration and open-minded problem solving. These are values that any military leader can respect.

Maj. Gen. (Ret). George A. Buskirk Jr., former adjutant general of the Indiana National Guard