Doan Resigns

As you know by now, GSA chief Lurita Doan has resigned. She said she did so at the request of the White House, but no one has been able to answer the question: Why now?

After all, both she and the White House stood firm in the face of intense criticism for almost a year, since the Office of Special Counsel urged the president to discipline her "to the fullest extent" for alleged violations of the Hatch Act. She has kept her head low for the most part in recent months.

Another questions: Where is the agency headed?

There are scads of issues up in the air, involving personnel, pricing practices, and whether the agency provides proper oversight.

Matthew Weigelt at Federal Computer Week had this piece.

Robert Brodsky and Elizabeth Newell had this piece in Government Executive.

Their logic doesn't hang together exactly, but they may be onto to what could have been a key, annoying factor for folks at the White House:

"In the end," they wrote, "it wasn't an investigation into potential Hatch Act violations, pressure from Capitol Hill or alleged interference in General Services Administration contract negotiations that brought down GSA Administrator Lurita A. Doan.

"While each of these controversies may have pushed the White House to the breaking point, Doan appeared to have survived them. Ultimately, her turbulent two-year tenure as head of the General Services Administration apparently came to an end Tuesday as a result of her ongoing and public feud with her agency's inspector general, Brian Miller."

Here's a link to Washington Post stories about Doan and the GSA.


By Robert O'Harrow |  May 1, 2008; 11:39 AM ET
Previous: Oh My | Next: It Lives

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



So what about their logic doesn't hang together?

Posted by: Hector | May 2, 2008 12:59 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company