Veterans' Benefits: Issues in the 110th Congress
Congressional research reportOct 16, 2008
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Order Code RL33985
Veterans’ Benefits: Issues in the 110th Congress
Updated October 16, 2008
Carol D. Davis, Coordinator,
and Shannon S. Loane
Knowledge Services Group
Christine Scott, Libby Perl, and David P. Smole
Domestic Social Policy Division
Douglas Reid Weimer
American Law Division
Veterans’ Benefits: Issues in the 110th Congress
Summary
Congressional interest in benefits for veterans has increased with the ongoing
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This report provides a general discussion of veterans’
benefits issues that are part of the legislative agenda of the 110th Congress or are
likely to be of legislative interest. Among those issues are disability compensation
and pensions; education benefits; homelessness; life insurance; the status or
eligibility of groups such as U.S. merchant seamen and World War II Filipino
veterans for veterans’ benefits; Reserve and National Guard eligibility for veterans’
benefits; the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and legal representation for
veterans. For each issue, an overview is provided, along with summaries of pertinent
pending legislation. In addition, an overview of the benefits and their eligibility
requirements, demographics for both the veteran population and the benefit
population, and summary data on the FY2008 budget for veterans’ benefits are
provided. Issues that are not addressed by this report are veterans’ medical care and
appropriations for the Department of Veterans Affairs. This report will be updated
upon relevant legislative activity.
Key Policy Staff
Name
Issues
Telephone
Carol D. Davis
Coordinator
7-8994
Christine Scott
Carol D. Davis
Status or eligibility issues;
veterans’ demographics;
VA budget; disability
compensation; pensions;
insurance programs
7-7366
7-8994
David P. Smole
Shannon S. Loane
Veterans’ and military
education benefits
7-0624
7-6223
Libby Perl
Homeless veterans
7-7806
Douglas Reid Weimer
U.S. Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims; legal
representation for veterans
7-7574
Sidath Viranga Panangala
Veterans’ health
7-0623
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Eligibility for Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Veteran Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
The Benefit Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Issues in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Status or Eligibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
U.S. Merchant Seamen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Filipino Veterans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Reserve and National Guard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Disability Compensation and Pension Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Disability Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Pension Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Homelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Life Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) and Family
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Traumatic Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (TSGLI) . . . . . . . 17
Veterans’ Group Life Insurance (VGLI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance (S-DVI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Legal Representation for Veterans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Veterans’ Benefits:
Issues in the 110th Congress
Introduction
Congress has been involved with providing benefits to veterans since the earliest
days of the nation, enacting the first veterans’ pension law in 1789. As the nation
grew and successive wars increased the number of veterans, the variety of benefits
that were available to veterans (e.g., disability compensation, education benefits, life
insurance) continued to develop. In addition, some benefits were extended to
veterans’ dependents and survivors, such as educational assistance, dependency and
indemnity compensation, and death pensions.
The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have heightened congressional
interest in veterans’ benefits. This report1 discusses veterans’ benefits issues that are
already part of the legislative agenda for the 110th Congress or are likely to be of
interest to Congress. These issues include disability compensation and pensions,
including the benefit claims backlog and the annual cost-of-living adjustment;
education benefits; homelessness; life insurance; the status or eligibility of groups,
such as U.S. merchant seamen and World War II Filipino veterans for veterans’
benefits; Reserve and National Guard eligibility for veterans’ benefits; the U.S. Court
of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and legal representation for veterans. These benefits
and issues fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA),
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). Also presented in this report are an
overview of the benefits and their eligibility requirements, data on both the veteran
population and the benefit population, and summary information on the FY2008
budget for veterans’ benefits. Issues that are not covered in this report are veterans’
medical care2 and appropriations for the VA.3
1
Charmaine Mercer, a former specialist in education policy at CRS, was one of the original
authors of this report.
2
For information on veterans’ medical care issues, see CRS Report RL33993, Veterans’
Health Care Issues, by Sidath Viranga Panangala.
3
For background information on appropriations for the Department of Veterans Affairs, see
CRS Report RL34558, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies:
FY2009 Appropriations, by Daniel H. Else, Christine Scott, and Sidath Viranga Panangala.
CRS-2
Overview
Benefits
Veterans and their spouses, dependents, or survivors may be eligible for a range
of benefits, including compensation for service-connected disabilities, educational
assistance, housing loans, life insurance, burial benefits, and a pension benefit for
older or permanently disabled low-income veterans who served during a period of
war. In its 562-page final report that was released on October 3, 2007, the Veterans
Disability Benefits Commission urged the VA and the Department of Defense to
develop uniform, consistent policies for rating veterans’ disabilities.4 The
commission, which was established by Title XV of the National Defense
Authorization Act for FY2004 (P.L. 108-136), was charged with evaluating the
appropriateness of the benefits available to veterans and their survivors as a result of
disability or death due to military service, the standards used to determine whether
or not veterans are compensated, and the appropriate level of each benefit.
Eligibility for Benefits
Eligibility for most VA benefits is primarily determined by the individual’s
active duty military service and the individual’s being discharged under conditions
other than dishonorable.5 For certain benefits, such as the pension benefit, at least
part of the active duty military service must have been during a period of war.6 For
many benefits, the eligibility requirements for members of the National Guard and
Reserve called to active duty will be different from those of the regular armed forces.
Certain civilian groups have also been recognized as being eligible for veterans
benefits. The GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-202) recognized the
services of the Women’s Air Forces Service Pilots (WASPs) — a civilian group that
was attached to the U.S. Army Air Force during World War II — as active duty
military service for benefits administered by the VA, and it provided a method for
other civilian groups to apply to the Secretary of the Air Force for similar
recognition. As of March 2007, a total of 38 civilian groups had received
recognition.7
4
Links to the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission’s final report, related documents,
and to other information on the group are available on the Commission’s website at
[http://www.vetscommission.org/].
5
Even if the condition of discharge generally bars an individual from benefits, certain
exceptions may apply. See CRS Report RL33113, Veterans Affairs: Basic Eligibility for
Disability Benefit Programs, by Douglas Reid Weimer.
6
Many wars have federally designated beginning and ending dates. For veterans’ benefits,
the periods of war are defined in 38 U.S.C. § 101(11). For additional information, see CRS
Report RS21405, U.S. Periods of War, by Barbara Salazar Torreon.
7
For a list of civilian groups with recognition, see 38 CFR Chapter 1 § 3.7.
CRS-3
Demographics
The VA is the major source, and in some cases the only source, for information
on the total veteran population and beneficiaries of veterans’ benefits. Estimates of
the veteran population will be different from the population receiving benefits during
a specific time period for several reasons, including that not all veterans are receiving
benefits in a given period of time; that benefits may be, depending on the specific
benefit, provided to veterans, surviving spouses, and children; and that some
veterans, surviving spouses, or children may receive more than one type of benefit
in a given period of time.
Veteran Population. The VA estimates8 the veteran population by various
characteristics, including age, sex, state, and period of service. As of September 30,
2007, there were an estimated 23.5 million living veterans in the United States and
Puerto Rico.
The five states with the largest estimated number of veterans (California,
Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, and New York) together accounted for 32.4% of the
total estimated population of veterans. The five states with the smallest estimated
number of veterans (Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming, North Dakota, and the District of
Columbia) together accounted for 1.1% of the total estimated number of veterans.9
As of September 30, 2007, the majority of all veterans (64.0%) were age 55 or
older, with 4.9% age 85 or older. Female veterans were 7.4% of the total veteran
population and had an age distribution that was generally younger than for all
veterans. As of September 30, 2007, only 31.1% of female veterans were age 55 or
older. The majority (56.4%) of female veterans were under age 50.
The Benefit Population. The VA also provides data on the number of
beneficiaries of veterans’ benefits in FY2007. Disability compensation benefits were
provided to 2,789,490 veterans, 332,837 survivors, and 1,163 children. In addition,
88,744 veterans were provided with a clothing allowance, and 1,534 veterans
received Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) payments.10 Pension benefits11 were
8
The Department of Veterans Affairs’ estimates (VetPop2004 Version 1.0, Office of the
Actuary, Office of Policy, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, December 2004) are based
on a model that uses detailed data on veterans from the decennial census through April
2000; actual Department of Defense (DOD) separations, including Reserve and National
Guard forces with a federal activation, through September 2003; and projected DOD
separations, including an estimate for an increased level of Reserve separations, through
September 2009.
9
According to 38 U.S.C. § 101(20), the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are considered
to be states for matters pertaining to veterans.
10
Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) payments are awards from successful challenges of
the Department of Veterans Affairs’ policies, procedures, or regulations in the U.S. Court
of Appeals for Veterans Claims under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
11
Pension benefits may be awarded to very low-income veterans who served during periods
of war and are either age 65 or are permanently and totally disabled (not service-connected)
(continued...)
CRS-4
provided to 325,378 veterans and 198,047 survivors. The caseload for readjustment
benefits (including education and training, work-study, tuition assistance, and the allvolunteer force educational assistance programs) was 585,367.12
Budget
The Administration’s FY2008 budget request for the VA was $83.9 billion.
This would have been an increase of $4.4 billion, or 5.5%, over the FY2007
appropriation (including the supplemental).
The FY2008 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) provided $87.6 billion in funding for the VA, with
50.8% of the funds for mandatory spending.13
One of the key issues for VA non-medical benefits in recent years has been the
size of the disability claims workload and the average time (183 days in FY2007)14
to process claims. The U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and
Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007 (P.L. 110-28), provided additional
funding to the VA in FY2007 for resources to address the large number of pending
claims and shorten processing times. P.L. 110-28 provided the VA with $60.75
million for hiring and training of additional claims processing personnel and $20
million for information technology to support claims processing. The total VA
FY2007 appropriation (including the supplemental funds provided by P.L. 110-28)
was $79.6 billion, with 51.9% of the funding for mandatory spending and 49.1% for
discretionary spending.
Issues in the 110th Congress
Status or Eligibility
While former members of the U.S. armed forces and members of a number of
civilian groups are eligible for benefits administered by the VA, other groups as well
have requested status as veterans or advocated additional veterans’ benefits from
Congress.
11
(...continued)
and to their eligible surviving spouses and dependent children.
12
Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2009 Budget Submission, Benefits and Burial
Programs and Departmental Administration, Volume 3 of 4, pp. 2A-3 and 2B-13,
[http://www.va.gov/budget/summary/2009/Volume_3-Benefits_and_Burial_and_Dept_A
dmin.pdf].
13
For more information on the VA budget, see CRS Report RL34558, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations, by Daniel
H. Else, Christine Scott, and Sidath Viranga Panangala.
14
Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2009 Budget Submission, Benefits and Burial
Programs and Departmental Administration, Volume 3 of 4, p. 4B-6,
[http://www.va.gov/budget/summary/2009/Volume_3-Benefits_and_Burial_and_Dept_A
dmin.pdf].
CRS-5
U.S. Merchant Seamen. Certain U.S. merchant seamen were recognized in
1988 as having active duty service for veterans benefits under P.L. 95-202. Merchant
seamen who received recognition either (1) served aboard Army-owned vessels or
certain merchant marine vessels in support of U.S. armed forces (vessels must have
some part of a qualifying voyage in contested waters between December 7, 1941 and
August 15, 1945); (2) were in a military invasion during World War II; or (3) were
requisitioned by the U.S. Army for Operation Mulberry in the 1944 invasion of
Normandy. U.S. merchant seamen who do not meet these criteria are not recognized
as having active duty service for the full range of veterans’ benefits.15
In the 110th Congress, H.R. 23 (sponsored by Representative Bob Filner) and S.
961 (sponsored by Senator E. Benjamin Nelson) would provide a monthly benefit of
$1,000 to qualified U.S. merchant seamen and their survivors. Under these bills, a
qualified U.S. merchant seaman is one who served between December 7, 1941, and
December 31, 1946, as a crew member aboard a vessel that (1) was operated by the
now defunct War Shipping Administration or the Office of Defense Transportation;
(2) did not operate on inland waters, the Great Lakes, or any U.S. lake, bay, or
harbor; (3) was under contract to, was chartered to, or was the property of, the U.S.
government; and (4) was serving the U.S. armed forces. In addition, the seaman had
to be licensed to serve (or documented for service) as a crew member. H.R. 23 was
reported by the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (H.Rept. 110-269, Pt. I) on
July 27, 2007, and the House passed the bill by a voice vote on July 30, 2007. As
amended, H.R. 23 would establish the Merchant Mariner Equity Compensation Fund,
which would provide a monthly payment of $1,000 to each U.S. merchant seaman
who met the previously stated qualifications, and would authorize appropriations to
the fund for FY2008-FY2012.16 H.R. 447 (sponsored by Representative Jeff
Fortenberry) would provide that merchant seamen who received the Mariners Medal
be provided VA health care on the same basis as recipients of the Purple Heart.
Filipino Veterans. Under current law, former members of the Regular or
“Old” Philippine Scouts who fought during World War II are recognized for all
benefits administered by the VA. Former members of the Commonwealth Army of
the Philippines are recognized for many of the benefits administered by the VA.
However, because of the economic differences between the United States and the
Philippines, benefits for residents of the Philippines have a lower dollar value than
those for U.S. residents. In addition, former members of two other Philippine groups
that fought during World War II, the Recognized Guerilla Forces and the New
Philippine Scouts, are recognized for only a limited number of benefits administered
by the VA.17
15
For more information on U.S. merchant seamen, see CRS Report RL33992, Veterans
Benefits: Merchant Seamen, by Christine Scott and Douglas Reid Weimer.
16
For more detailed information on this bill, see CRS Report RL33992, Veterans Benefits:
Merchant Seamen, by Christine Scott and Douglas Reid Weimer.
17
For more information on Filipino veterans, see CRS Report RL33876, Overview of
Filipino Veterans’ Benefits, by Sidath Viranga Panangala, Christine Scott, and Carol D.
Davis.
CRS-6
In the 110th Congress, H.R. 760 (sponsored by Representative Bob Filner) and
S. 57 (sponsored by Senator Daniel Inouye) would eliminate the distinction between
the Regular or “Old” Philippine Scouts and the other three groups of veterans —
Commonwealth Army of the Philippines, Recognized Guerrilla Forces, and New
Philippine Scouts — and make them all fully eligible for VA benefits similar to those
received by U.S. veterans. Hearings on these bills were held by the House
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on February 15, 2007, and by the Senate Committee
on Veterans’ Affairs on April 11, 2007. On July 17, 2007, the House Committee on
Veterans’ Affairs ordered H.R. 760 to be reported by a voice vote. S. 66 (sponsored
by Senator Daniel Inouye) would require the Secretary of the Army to determine,
based on the written application of any person who is a national of the Philippine
Islands, whether or not the person performed any military service in the Philippine
Islands in aid of the armed forces of the United States during World War II that
would qualify the person to receive any U.S. veterans, military, or other benefits.
S. 1315 (sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka) would expand eligibility for VA
benefits for members of the organized military forces (including Recognized Guerilla
Forces) of the Commonwealth of the Philippines and the Philippine Scouts, including
provisions for dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) and pensions for
individuals living outside of the United States. S. 1315, which was reported by the
Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept. 110-148) on August 29, 2007, was
passed by the Senate on a 96-1 vote on April 24, 2008. The amended version of S.
1315 that the House passed by a voice vote on September 22, 2008, did not contain
the Filipino veteran benefit provisions.
H.R. 6897 (sponsored by Representative Bob Filner), which the House passed
by a 392-23 vote on September 23, 2008, would provide one-time payments to
Filipino veterans who served in the Commonwealth Army of the Philippines,
Recognized Guerrilla Forces, and the Philippine Scouts. The payments would be
$15,000 for U.S. citizens and $9,000 for non-U.S. citizens. The bill would establish
the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund and authorize it to make the onetime payments, subject to the availability of appropriated funds. A $198 million
appropriation for the proposed Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund is
provided in Section 160 of Division A (the FY2009 continuing resolution portion)
of H.R. 2638 (sponsored by Representative David Price), which the House passed by
a 370-58 vote on September 24, 2008. The Senate passed the bill by a 78-12 vote on
September 27, 2008, and it became P.L. 110-329 on September 30, 2008.
Reserve and National Guard18
Reservists called to active duty may, depending on the length of active military
service and discharge conditions (other than dishonorable), qualify for the full range
of benefits administered by the VA. Reservists who are not called to active duty (i.e.,
not activated) may qualify for some benefits administered by the VA. National
18
Reservists are members of the reserve elements of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine
Corps, and Coast Guard. National Guard are members of the Army National Guard and the
Air National Guard.
CRS-7
Guard members establish eligibility for benefits by being called to federal service
during a period of war or a national emergency. More specifically:
!
Reservists and Guard members are eligible for disability
compensation for service-connected disabilities — disabilities that
are incurred or aggravated during active duty (or active-duty
training) — and for certain other conditions incurred during inactiveduty training.
!
Reservists and Guard members may be eligible for educational
benefits. The determination of eligibility is made by either the
Department of Defense or the Department of Homeland Security if
the Reservist or Guard member is activated, or by the Reserve
component if the Reservist or Guard member is not activated.
!
Reservists and Guard members may be eligible for VA home loans
if they have served at least six years, are activated for at least 90
days, or have service-connected disabilities. Reservists or Guard
members who are not eligible for the VA home loan benefit may be
eligible for Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans on
favorable terms.
!
Reservists and Guard members are eligible for VA life insurance.
!
Reservists are eligible for VA burial flags if they served their initial
obligation, were discharged for service-connected disabilities, or
died while they were members of the reserves.
H.R. 2259 (sponsored by Representative Peter Welch) would require the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to prepare a plan within
180 days of enactment that would maximize participation in the Benefits at Delivery
Discharge Program by members of the Reserve. Hearings were held on H.R. 2259
by the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs’ Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity on June 21, 2007. H.R. 3798 (sponsored by Representative Robin
Hayes) would expand the employment protections of the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) to members of the National
Guard who are called to duty for required drills and training under Section 502(f) of
Title 32 of the U.S. Code. The House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs’s
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity held hearings on H.R. 3798 on April 16,
2008. H.R. 4247 (sponsored by Representative Adam Smith) would provide
additional transition benefits for members of the Reserve, including a year of
transitional mental health care, more educational assistance, a provision to maintain
the pay of federal employees called to duty as members of the Reserve,19 and aid to
19
In general, federal civilian employees called to active duty in Reserve components do not
receive their civilian pay. A federal civilian employee called to active duty can receive, for
a limited time (15 days), both civilian and military pay. Under certain circumstances, a
federal employee may, for a limited time, receive “gap” pay (the difference between the
(continued...)
CRS-8
state and local governments that continue to pay employees called to duty as
members of the Reserve.
Disability Compensation and Pension Benefits
Disability Compensation. A veteran disabled because of an injury or
disease that was incurred, or aggravated, during active military service may be
entitled to a monthly disability compensation benefit. The veteran must have been
discharged, or separated from service, under conditions other than dishonorable. The
following groups of veterans qualify for disability compensation because their
disabilities are presumed to be service-connected: former prisoners of war; veterans
exposed to herbicides during military operations in Vietnam; veterans exposed to
ionizing radiation; and certain Gulf War veterans.
The monthly disability compensation benefit is not subject to federal income
taxes, and the amount varies based on the level of disability and the number of
dependents. The FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 110-181)
eliminated the offset of VA disability compensation benefits from any disability
severance pay received from the military.
To receive benefits, a veteran must file a claim for benefits and have the VA
evaluate his or her disability to assign a rating for the disability of between 0% to
100% (in 10% increments).20
In the 110th Congress, H.R. 2943 (introduced by Representative John Sarbanes)
would change the manner in which disabled veterans could qualify to receive Social
Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. The bill would let veterans with
service-connected disabilities who are rated and certified by the VA as totally
disabled be eligible for SSDI benefits without having to be evaluated by the Social
Security Administration (SSA) if they meet the other requirements for SSDI benefits.
Currently, SSA evaluates all applicants (veterans and non-veterans) to determine
their eligibility for SSDI benefits.21
Claims Pending. The inventory of claims pending for disability
compensation and pensions has been a long-standing concern for veterans service
organizations, the VA, and Congress.22 According to the Government Accountability
19
(...continued)
employee’s federal civilian pay and military pay).
20
For more information on the VA’s disability rating system, see CRS Report RL33991,
Disability Evaluation of Military Servicemembers, by Christine Scott, Sidath Viranga
Panangala, and Charles A. Henning.
21
For more information on the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program, see
CRS Report RL32279, Primer on Disability Benefits: Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), by Scott Szymendera.
22
See, for instance: (1) House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Press Release, “VA’s
Claims Processing System is in Need of 21st Century Reform”: House Veterans’ Affairs
(continued...)
CRS-9
Office (GAO), despite taking steps to improve its disability claims process, VA
continues to face challenges in reducing the number of claims pending and speeding
up the process of deciding claims.23
In the 110th Congress, hearings have been held by both the House and Senate
Veterans’ Affairs Committees on the VA’s disability claims processing system and
the timeliness of claims processing.24 During these hearings, the VA has outlined
steps that it has taken, or plans to take in the future, to improve the timeliness of
claims processing. Other witnesses provided testimony in the hearings on their
perceptions of the expected impact of the VA’s steps to improve claims processing
and on additional measures or reforms that they believe are needed to improve the
VA’s claims processing.
To address this issue, legislation has been introduced in the 110th Congress that
would have an impact on disability determinations by the VA. Each chamber has its
22
(...continued)
Subcommittee Works to Improve VA’s Claims Processing System and Eliminate Backlog,
February 14, 2008, at [http://veterans.house.gov/news/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=205]; (2)
Government Accountability Office (GAO), Veterans’ Disability Benefits: Claims
Processing Challenges Persist, while VA Continues to Take Steps to Address Them,
Statement of Daniel Bertoni, GAO Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security,
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, House
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, GAO-08-473T, February 14, 2008, available at
[http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08473t.pdf]; (3) GAO, Veterans’ Disability Benefits:
Processing of Claims Continues to Present Challenges, Statement of Daniel Bertoni, GAO
Acting Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues, Testimony before the
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, House Committee on
Veterans’ Affairs , GAO-07-562T, March 13, 2007, available at
[http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07562t.pdf]; (4) John L. Davis, VA Vows to End Claims
Backlog: Automation, Teamwork and More Staff are Key To Reducing the 650,000 VA
Compensation Claims Clogging the System, VFW Magazine, June 1, 2002.
23
Government Accountability Office (GAO), Veterans’ Disability Benefits: Claims
Processing Challenges Persist, while VA Continues to Take Steps to Address Them,
Statement of Daniel Bertoni, GAO Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security,
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs,
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, House of Representatives; GAO-8-473T, February 14,
2008, available at [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08473t.pdf].
24
(1) U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Review of Veterans’ Disability
Compensation: Undue Delay in Claims Processing, Hearings, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., July 9,
2008, available at [http://veterans.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?pageid=16&release_id
=11731&view=all]. (2) U.S. Congress, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Examining
the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ Claims Processing System, Hearings, 110th Cong.,
2nd sess., February 14, 2008, available at [http://veterans.house.gov/hearings/
hearing.aspx?NewsID=189]. (3) U.S. Congress, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs,
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, Personal Costs of the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs Claims Backlog, Field Hearing, Serial No. 110-51, 110th
Cong., 1st sess., October 9, 2007, available at [http://veterans.house.gov/hearings/
transcript.aspx?newsid=131]. (4) U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs,
VA Claims Adjudication Process, Hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., March 7, 2007, available
at [http://veterans.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?pageid=16&release_id=10805&view=all].
CRS-10
version of the Wounded Warrior Assistance Act of 2007 — H.R. 1538 in the House
(introduced by Representative Ike Skelton) and S. 1283 in the Senate (introduced by
Senator Mark Pryor). Both bills contain provisions that address disability evaluation,
including a mandate for a joint Department of Defense (DOD)-VA study and report
to Congress on the disability evaluation systems used by each department,
recommendations for improvement, and the feasibility of consolidating the two
systems. H.R. 1538 was reported by the House Committee on Armed Services
(H.Rept. 110-68, Pt. 1) on March 23, 2007. The House passed the bill on a 426-0
vote on March 28, 2007, and the Senate passed it by unanimous consent on July 25,
2007. On November 7, 2007, the VA and the DOD announced a pilot program for
a single physical to be used by both departments for disability evaluation and rating
purposes. The one-year pilot program, which began the week of November 29, 2007,
is being conducted at the three military medical centers in the Washington, DC area:
the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the National Naval Medical Center, and the
Air Force’s Malcolm Grow Medical Center at Andrews Air Force Base.
H.R. 653 (sponsored by Representative Thomas Reynolds) would have the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs accept (if there is no clear and convincing evidence to
the contrary) that an injury or disease is service-connected based on the sworn
affidavit of a veteran who served in combat on or before July 27, 1953 (prior to or
during the Korean War). H.R. 797 (sponsored by Representative Tammy Baldwin)
and S. 1163 (introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka) would expand disability
compensation for veterans who are visually impaired in both eyes by using a standard
definition of blindness used by other federal agencies, including the Social Security
Administration. The House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs reported H.R. 797
(H.Rept. 110-57) on March 20, 2007, and the House passed the bill on a 424-0 vote
on March 21, 2007. The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs reported S. 1163
(S.Rept. 110-143) on August 3, 2007. On November 2, 2007, the Senate deleted the
language of H.R. 797, replaced it with the text of S. 1163, as amended, and passed
H.R. 797 by unanimous consent. On December 11, 2007, the House agreed to the
Senate amendment with additional House amendments. The Senate agreed to the
House amendments on December 17, 2007, and H.R. 797 became P.L. 110-157 on
December 26, 2007.
Cost-of-Living Adjustment. Under current law, certain benefits for
veterans, survivors, and dependents — disability compensation, pension, dependency
and indemnity compensation, and the clothing allowance — are not automatically
adjusted for inflation. Instead, legislation has been introduced and enacted each year
to provide an annual veterans’ cost-of-living (or inflation) adjustment (COLA) equal
to the COLA provided to Social Security recipients.
In the second session of the 110th Congress in 2008, H.R. 5826 (sponsored by
Representative Ciro Rodriguez) and S. 2617 (sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka)
would provide a veterans’ COLA equal to the COLA for Social Security benefits
effective December 1, 2008. H.R. 5826, which was reported by the House
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (H.Rept. 110-643) on May 15, 2008, was passed by
the House on a 417-0 vote on May 21, 2008. S. 2617 was reported by the Senate
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept. 110-430) on July 24, 2008. The bill, which
was passed by the Senate by unanimous consent on July 30, 2008, and by the House
on a 418-0 vote on September 10, 2008, became P.L. 110-324 on September 24,
CRS-11
2008. The upcoming veterans’ COLA will match the 5.8% Social Security COLA
for 2009 that was announced by the Social Security Administration on October 16,
2008.25
During the first session of the 110th Congress in 2007, H.R. 1284 (sponsored by
Representative John Hall) would have provided a veterans’ COLA equal to the
COLA for Social Security benefits effective December 1, 2007. The bill was
reported by the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (H.Rept. 110-56) on March
20, 2007. H.R. 1284, which was passed by the House on a 418-0 vote on March 21,
2007, and by the Senate by unanimous consent on October 18, 2007, became P.L.
110-111 on November 5, 2007. The veterans’ COLA matched the 2.3% Social
Security COLA for 2008.26 The bill’s companion measure in the Senate was S. 423
(sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka), which was reported by the Senate Committee
on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept. 110-135) on July 24, 2007. Also introduced during the
first session were S. 161 (sponsored by Senator John Thune) and H.R. 402
(sponsored by Representative Joe Knollenberg), which would create an annual
automatic veterans’ COLA based on the Social Security adjustment.
Pension Benefits. A veteran of limited means who has wartime service (i.e.,
part of his or her military service occurred during a period of war) and is either age
65 or older or is permanently and totally disabled (not service-connected) may be
eligible for a monthly pension benefit. However, the pension benefit was designed
to provide monthly income to very-low income veterans who served during times of
war, so the veteran’s gross income can reduce the maximum benefit. The pension
benefit is higher if the veteran is housebound or requires aid and attendance.27
Legislation has been introduced in the 110th Congress that would alter the
amount of, or eligibility for, the pension benefits. H.R. 1272 (sponsored by
Representative Shelley Berkley) would increase the maximum annual pension benefit
amount. H.R. 1900 (sponsored by Representative Nick Rahall) would expand
eligibility for the pension benefit to veterans who received an expeditionary medal
during a period of service that was not a period of war. H.R. 1901 (sponsored by
Representative Nick Rahall) would expand eligibility for the pension benefit to
veterans who served during specific periods of time in the Republic of Korea,
Lebanon, Granada, or Panama. The Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and
Memorial Affairs of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs held hearings on
H.R. 1900 and H.R. 1901 on July 31, 2007. S. 2025 (sponsored by Senator Daniel
Akaka) would provide an additional monthly pension amount for veterans 65 or older
who are eligible for the pension benefit because of age and are also permanently and
25
Social Security Administration, “Automatic Increase: Latest Cost-of-Living Adjustment,”
available online at [http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/latestCOLA.html].
26
Social Security Administration, “Automatic Increases: Cost-of-Living Adjustments: Social
Security Cost-of-Living Adjustments” historical table, available online at
[http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/colaseries.html].
27
“Aid and attendance” is an additional benefit paid to veterans, their spouses, surviving
spouses, and parents. This allowance is paid in all compensation, dependency indemnity
compensation, and pension programs. The payment is based on the need for aid and
attendance of another person, or by a specific disability.
CRS-12
totally disabled, or who are housebound due to disabilities but do not qualify for aid
and attendance. S. 1315 (sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka) would clarify that a
veteran who qualifies for the pension benefit based on age is not eligible for an
additional payment because the veteran is housebound or requires aid and attendance.
S. 1315, which was reported by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept.
110-148) on August 29, 2007, was passed by the Senate on a 96-1 vote on April 24,
2008. The amended version of S. 1315 that the House passed by a voice vote on
September 22, 2008, did not contain this provision.
Education
Congressional interest in the education benefits afforded to military personnel
greatly increased after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the U.S.
military became involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, which resulted in increasing
numbers of military personnel and reservists being called to active duty.
Veterans’ and servicemembers’ education benefits were significantly expanded
on June 30, 2008, when President George W. Bush signed the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) into law. Title V of the law, the Post-9/11
Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, extends education benefits to veterans
and servicemembers who have served on active duty in the armed forces (including
members of reserve components under a call or order to active duty) for at least 90
days after September 10, 2001.28 Under this program, individuals with at least 36
months of active duty service after that date are eligible for 36 months of educational
assistance benefits consisting of
!
!
!
tuition and fees (limited to tuition charged at the most expensive
public institution in the state in which the veteran or servicemember
is enrolled);
a monthly housing allowance (based on average housing prices in
the area in which the veteran or servicemember is enrolled); and
a $1,000 annual stipend for books and required educational
expenses.
Provisions for funds for tutorial assistance, licensing, and certification tests are also
included. Benefit eligibility for individuals who serve fewer than 36 months on
active duty would be calculated as a percentage of the total maximum benefits. In
addition, the law includes provisions allowing servicemembers who have served at
least six years on active duty and who agree to serve at least four more years to
transfer their education benefits to their dependents. The effective date for the new
benefits is August 1, 2009.
The expanded veterans’ education benefits in P.L. 110-252 are substantially
similar to provisions in S. 22 (sponsored by Senator Jim Webb) and its companion
bill, H.R. 5740 (sponsored by Representative Harry Mitchell). The benefits were
28
For more information on the new veterans’ education benefits, see CRS Report RS22929,
A Brief Overview of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, by Shannon
S. Loane.
CRS-13
included in an amendment to the war supplemental bill, H.R. 2642 (sponsored by
Representative Chet Edwards), which the House passed on a 256-166 vote on May
15, 2008. On May 22, 2008, the Senate passed an amendment to H.R. 2642 that also
included expanded veterans’ education benefits on a 75-22 vote. In a 416-12 vote on
June 19, 2008, the House approved revisions to the Senate-passed version of H.R.
2642, which reflected compromises on enhanced veterans’ education benefits and
other domestic issues. The Senate passed the compromise legislation on June 26,
2008, by a 92-6 vote.29
S. 3339 (sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka), a technical corrections bill to the
Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act, was reported by the Senate
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept. 110-433) on July 26, 2008. This bill would
affect the program in several ways, including clarifying how benefit levels are to be
calculated for certain training outside the United States and declaring that for-profit
institutions of higher education would not be eligible to participate in the Yellow
Ribbon G.I. Education Enhancement Program.30
On September 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity of the
House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs held an oversight hearing on implementation
of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance program. Committee members
heard testimony from Keith Pedigo, VA Associate Deputy Under Secretary in the
Veterans Benefits Administration’s Office of Policy and Program Management,
about the VA’s intention to use contractor support to develop a system for the
electronic processing of applications and enrollment information. Committee
members expressed concerns over the decision to use contractors, the bidding process
being used to hire a contractor, and the VA’s ability to meet the August 1, 2009
implementation deadline for the new program.
The Post-9/11 Educational Assistance program is the latest of several federal
veterans’ educational assistance programs that have been enacted since 1944. The
Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 (P.L. 78-346), more commonly referred to
as the GI Bill of Rights, provided support, including education benefits, to veterans
of World War II. After the original GI Bill expired in 1956, other laws and programs
enacted for similar purposes included the Korean Conflict GI Bill (Veterans’
Readjustment Assistance Act of 1952, P.L. 82-550), the Vietnam-Era GI Bill (P.L.
89-358), the Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational Assistance Program (VEAP,
29
For more information on the war supplemental appropriations, see CRS Report RL34451,
FY2008 Spring Supplemental Appropriations and FY2009 Bridge Appropriations for
Military Operations, International Affairs, and Other Purposes (P.L. 110-252), by Stephen
Daggett, Susan B. Epstein, Rhoda Margesson, Curt Tarnoff, Pat Towell, Catherine Dale, and
Shannon S. Loane.
30
The Yellow Ribbon G.I. Education Enhancement Program provides additional funding for
veterans or servicemembers attending private institutions. Every dollar that a college or
university makes available to participating individuals would be matched by the VA, up to
50% of the difference between the cost of tuition and fees and the amount otherwise
provided for tuition and fees under the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance program.
CRS-14
P.L. 94-502), the current Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB, P.L. 98-525), and the Reserve
Educational Assistance Program (REAP, P.L. 108-375).31
In addition to the newly-enacted Post-9/11 Veterans’ Educational Assistance
program, the following educational assistance programs are available to veterans and
servicemembers:
!
!
!
MGIB-Active Duty (MGIB-AD) — for individuals who are on
active duty or following separation from active duty;
MGIB-Selected Reserves (MGIB-SR) — for members of the
selected reserves; and
MGIB-Reserve Educational Assistance Program (REAP) — for
members of reserve components who are called or ordered to active
duty in response to a war or national emergency as declared by the
President or Congress.
Maximum monthly benefit amounts for full-time enrollment in eligible programs are
$1,321.00 for active duty members (MGIB-AD) who enlist for three years or more
(as of August 1, 2008); $1,056.80 for individuals in the selected reserves (REAP)
who are called to active duty and who serve more than two consecutive years on
active duty (as of August 1, 2008); and $329.00 for members of the selected reserves
(MGIB-SR) who are not serving on active duty (as of October 1, 2008).32
While servicemembers are required to elect to participate in the MGIB program
at the time of their enlistment and to agree to make 12 months of payments into the
program, no such requirements apply to the Post-9/11 program. Individuals may be
able to receive benefits under multiple veterans’ educational assistance programs (to
a maximum of 48 months), but they may not receive benefits under more than one
program at a time. Additionally, veterans and servicemembers may be eligible to
receive federal student aid through programs authorized under the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended. Recently the HEA was amended under the Higher
Education Opportunity Act (P.L. 110-315) to provide more favorable education
benefits to veterans and servicemembers.33
31
For more information about the various federal education benefits available to veterans
and military personnel, see CRS Report RL34549, A Brief History of Veterans’ Education
Benefits and Their Value, by David P. Smole and Shannon S. Loane.
32
The benefit amounts shown for each program are for full-time institutional training. The
amounts are less for individuals who attend school less than full-time and who served less
than the aforementioned number of years. Links to the latest education benefit payment rate
sch e d ul e s for e a c h of th ese th r ee p r o gr ams ar e availab le at
[http://www.gibill.va.gov/GI_Bill_Info/rates.htm].
33
For more information on provisions concerning veterans and servicemembers in the
Higher Education Act, see CRS Report RL34654, The Higher Education Opportunity Act:
Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, by David P. Smole, Blake Alan Naughton,
Jeffrey J. Kuenzi, and Rebecca R. Skinner.
CRS-15
Homelessness
The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in heightened
congressional attention to the issue of homeless veterans. The VA estimates that
approximately 154,000 veterans are homeless on any given night.34 According to two
studies that have attempted to capture the characteristics of the homeless, veterans
make up between 19% and 23% of the adult homeless population.35 Studies indicate
that both male and female veterans are more likely to be homeless than their
nonveteran counterparts.36 Among the explanations for the overrepresentation of
veterans among the homeless are mental health diagnoses, including post-traumatic
stress disorder, addictions to alcohol and other substances, and physical health
problems.37
Multiple programs exist to serve homeless veterans. The primary programs are
the VA’s Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program, the Domiciliary Care for
Homeless Veterans program, the Health Care for Homeless Veterans program, and
the Compensated Work Therapy Program. The Department of Labor also has a
program for homeless veterans called the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program.
In FY2007, an estimated $266 million was provided for these five programs to assist
homeless veterans.38
In addition, a collaboration between the VA and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD), called HUD VA Supported Housing (HUD-VASH),
provides permanent housing and supportive services to homeless veterans with
34
John H. Kuhn and John Nakashima, Community Homelessness Assessment, Local
Education and Networking Group (CHALENG) for Veterans: The Fourteenth Annual
Progress Report on Public Law 105-114: Services for Homeless Veterans Assessment and
Coordination, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, February 28, 2008, available online at
[http://www1.va.gov/homeless/docs/CHALENG_14th_annual_Rpt_7-7-08.pdf].
35
The estimate of 19% included only the sheltered homeless population, while the estimate
of 23% included the unsheltered and sheltered populations. See U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, The Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress,
February 28, 2007, p. 32, available online at [http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/
ahar.pdf], and Martha R. Burt, Laudan Y. Aron, et al., Homelessness: Programs and the
People They Serve: Summary Report: Findings of the National Survey of Homeless
Assistance Providers and Clients, Urban Institute, December 1999, p. 18, available online
at [http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/homelessness.pdf].
36
See Robert Rosenheck, Linda Frisman, and An-Me Chung, “The Proportion of Veterans
Among Homeless Men,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 84, no. 3 (March 1994),
p. 466, available online at [http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/84/3/466]; and Gail Gamache,
Robert Rosenheck, and Richard Tessler, “Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among
Homeless Women,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 93, no. 7 (July 2003), p. 1134,
available online at [http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/93/7/1132].
37
Testimony of Cheryl Beversdorf, Director, National Coalition for Homeless Veterans,
before the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Military Construction and
Veterans Affairs, FY2008 Appropriations, 110th Cong., 1st sess., March 8, 2007.
38
For more information on programs for homeless veterans, see CRS Report RL34024,
Veterans and Homelessness, by Libby Perl.
CRS-16
chronic mental illnesses or chronic substance abuse disorders. Homeless veterans
receive Section 8 vouchers from HUD and supportive services through VA medical
centers. Initially, the program provided about 1,700 Section 8 vouchers for homeless
veterans in 1992. According to the VA, most of those vouchers are still being used
by veterans. No other vouchers were funded until the December 26, 2007 enactment
of the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161), in which Congress
appropriated $75 million for additional Section 8 vouchers for homeless veterans.
On April 16, 2008, HUD announced the award of 10,105 vouchers to housing
authorities in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.39
Legislation in the 110th Congress includes S. 1233 (sponsored by Senator Daniel
Akaka), which was reported by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept.
110-147) on August 29, 2007. The bill would address the per diem portion of the
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program by removing the legal requirement
that per diem payments to service providers be offset by the receipt of other sources
of funding. It would also create a demonstration program to identify members of the
armed services who are at risk of homelessness upon leaving active duty and to
provide counseling and supportive services for these individuals. Similar to H.R.
2874 (described below), the bill would reauthorize the demonstration program for
veterans leaving prison and enhance the ability of domiciliary care programs to serve
female veterans. The bill would also create a program to provide supportive services
for very-low income veterans and their families who are living in permanent housing.
H.R. 2874 (sponsored by Representative Michael Michaud), which was reported
by the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (H.Rept. 110-268) on July 27, 2007,
and passed by the House on a voice vote on July 30, 2007, contains provisions that
would create a new program to provide supportive services to low-income veterans
and their families, enhance the ability of domiciliary care programs to serve female
veterans, and reauthorize a demonstration program to assist veterans who are
transitioning from prison and other institutions to non-institutional settings.40
Life Insurance
The VA administers several life insurance programs for veterans. Three
programs are closed for enrollment, but still have active policies: United States
Government Life Insurance (a World War I program); National Service Life
Insurance (a World War II program); and Veterans Special Life Insurance (a Korean
War program). The following current programs are open for enrollment.
39
For a list of housing authorities and the number of vouchers allocated to each, see
[http://www.hud.gov/news/releasedocs/hud-vash_chart.doc].
40
For descriptions of additional bills pertaining to homeless veterans that have been
introduced in the 110th Congress, see CRS Report RL30442, Homelessness: Targeted
Federal Programs and Recent Legislation, by Libby Perl, Adrienne L. Fernandes, Gail
McCallion, Garrine P. Laney, Ramya Sundararaman, and Barbara English.
CRS-17
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI)41 and Family
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI). SGLI coverage is available
to eligible servicemembers in $50,000 increments up to $400,000. Spouses and
dependent children are eligible for FSGLI if the servicemember is insured under
SGLI. Under FSGLI, spouse coverage can be elected in $10,000 increments up to
$100,000 but cannot exceed the servicemember’s SGLI coverage amount.
Dependent children coverage under FSGLI is $10,000 and is automatic for
servicemembers with SGLI coverage.
Traumatic Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (TSGLI). TSGLI
became effective December 1, 2005, and all servicemembers with SGLI coverage are
automatically covered by TSGLI. For specified traumatic injuries, TSGLI provides
a benefit that ranges from $25,000 to $100,000, depending on the type and severity
of the traumatic injury. TSGLI benefits are also retroactive to October 7, 2001, for
traumatic injuries incurred in Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi
Freedom. The servicemember applies to his or her uniformed service for a TSGLI
benefit. The uniformed service determines whether the servicemember is eligible for
it, and, if so, the amount that he or she should receive. Then the uniformed service
notifies the VA to pay the TSGLI benefit to the servicemember.
Veterans’ Group Life Insurance (VGLI). VGLI coverage is available in
$10,000 increments up to $400,000, but it cannot exceed the level of SGLI coverage
that the member had in force at the time of separation from service. Upon separation
from service, an SGLI member can convert his or her coverage to a commercial plan
offered by participating commercial insurance companies or to a renewable VGLI
policy.
Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance (S-DVI). S-DVI coverage is
available in $1,000 increments up to $10,000 for veterans who do not have
dishonorable discharges, were released from active duty after April 25, 1951, and
received new service-connected disability ratings within two years of applying for SDVI coverage. In addition, supplemental coverage of $20,000 is available for S-DVI
policy holders who are under age 65, are eligible for waivers of S-DVI premiums due
to total disability, and apply for the supplemental coverage within one year of being
notified that the premium waiver has been granted.
In the 110th Congress, H.R. 585 (sponsored by Representative Stephanie Herseth
Sandlin) and S. 225 (sponsored by Senator Larry Craig) would expand retroactive
TSGLI coverage by eliminating the requirement that the traumatic injury be incurred
in Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom. Hearings on H.R. 585
were held by the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs of the
House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on June 19, 2007. S. 643 (sponsored by
Senator Daniel Akaka) and H.R. 2026 (sponsored by Representative Walter Jones,
Jr.) would increase the supplemental S-DVI benefit from $20,000 to $40,000. H.R.
2697 (sponsored by Representative Doug Lamborn) and S. 1265 (sponsored by
Senator Larry Craig) would expand eligibility for veterans’ mortgage life insurance
41
For more information on SGLI, see CRS Report RL32769, Military Death Benefits: Status
and Proposals, by David F. Burrelli and Jennifer R. Corwell.
CRS-18
to include members of the armed services who are receiving specially adapted
housing assistance from the VA. The Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and
Memorial Affairs of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs held hearings on
H.R. 2697 on July 31, 2007.
S. 1315 (sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka) would make several changes to
the insurance programs administered by the VA, including
(1) creating a new level-premium term life insurance program for disabled
veterans (who may switch coverage from S-DVI) that has a maximum
value of $50,000 and can be taken in $10,000 increments (veterans
age 70 and older have a maximum value of 20% of the maximum
value in place before turning age 70);
(2) expanding SGLI to include certain members of the Ready Reserve;
(3) increasing the amount of S-DVI supplemental coverage from $20,000
to $30,000;
(4) expanding eligibility for retroactive TSGLI coverage; and
(5) providing for the designation of a fiduciary under TSGLI.
S. 1315, which was reported by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept.
110-148) on August 29, 2007, was passed by the Senate on a 96-1 vote on April 24,
2008. The House passed an amended version of S. 1315 by a voice vote on
September 22, 2008.
H.R. 1585 (sponsored by Representative Ike Skeleton), which contained a
provision that would have provided for the designation of a fiduciary or trustee for
benefits under TSGLI for servicemembers who are medically incapacitated, was
vetoed by President George W. Bush on December 28, 2007. This provision,
however, was subsequently included in H.R. 4986 (sponsored by Representative Ike
Skelton), which was passed by the House on a 369-46 vote on January 16, 2008, and
by the Senate on a 91-3 vote on January 22, 2008. H.R. 4986 became P.L. 110-181
on January 28, 2008.
Legal Representation for Veterans
Since the American Civil War, Congress has regulated the representation of
veterans before the VA and its predecessors. This regulation has continued to evolve
over the years, with Congress establishing various standards for representation,
criteria and guidelines for fees, and limitation on when a veteran may engage the
services of an attorney (on a fee basis) to represent him or her in the appeals process.
The VA claims appeal process is a detailed multistep procedure.42 A recently
enacted law — the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act
of 200643 (“act”) — has modified attorney participation in appeals. The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs (“Secretary”) is required to provide additional qualifications and
42
See CRS Report RL33704, Veterans Affairs: The Appeal Process for Veterans’ Claims,
by Douglas Reid Weimer.
43
P.L. 109-461, Title I.
CRS-19
standards for agents44 and attorneys who represent veterans before the VA. These
standards deal with (1) training and character and (2) fee criteria and limitations. The
Secretary is authorized to charge and collect fees from the agents or attorneys to be
used for administrative expenses for veterans’ benefits programs. The following
grounds for suspension of agents and attorneys are provided in the act: presenting
frivolous claims, prior suspensions, charging excessive or unreasonable fees, or
failure to comply with the Secretary’s regulations.
A significant change that the act made in the role of attorneys in the appeal
process is when in the appeal process an attorney may commence services for fees.
Previously, an attorney could not represent a veteran for a fee until the Board of
Veterans Appeals (BVA) made a final decision.45 This had the effect of excluding
an attorney from the process until all of the administrative appeals had been
exhausted. The act now permits an attorney to enter the appeal process at a much
earlier date — after the veteran has received a decision on his or her claim from the
VA and decides to appeal this initial decision administratively through the filing of
a Notice of Disagreement (NOD).46 An attorney may now provide representation for
a fee after the NOD is filed. The act requires the Secretary to provide Congress with
an evaluation of the effect of the new system of representation. The act also modified
the requirements to file attorney fee agreements so as to reflect the earlier point when
an attorney or agent can enter the appeal process. The Secretary is also authorized
to review a fee agreement, and the Secretary may order a reduction in an agreed upon
fee if the Secretary finds the fee excessive or unreasonable. The Secretary’s decision
may be reviewed by the BVA, which is authorized to make the final review of the
issue.47
This change in the veterans’ appeal procedure has been somewhat controversial.
While veterans’ groups such as the National Organization of Veterans Advocates
(NOVA) and the Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) have supported the change,
other groups — most notably, the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) — have
vigorously opposed the legislative change, continue to oppose implementation of the
law, and are seeking a repeal of the law.48 Opposition to the change may be
summarized into three broad categories. First, representatives of veterans’ groups
have been the exclusive representatives of veterans in the VA administrative appeal
process and are reluctant to change this arrangement. Second, there is a belief that
any benefits should belong exclusively to the veteran and should not be shared or
paid to a legal representative. Third, there may be a reluctance to have previous work
done by veteran representatives reviewed by attorneys.
44
“Agents” or representatives of various veterans’ service organizations may represent a
veteran in his/her appeal process. See CRS Report RL33704, Veterans Affairs: The Appeal
Process for Veterans’ Claims, by Douglas Reid Weimer.
45
Id. at 3. See Figure I. Appeal Process.
46
Id.
47
38 U.S.C. § 7104.
48
See [http://www.dav.org/voters/claims_process.html].
CRS-20
H.R. 1318 (introduced by Representative Ron Lewis) would repeal the authority
for certain agent or attorney representation in veterans’ benefit cases before the VA.
In effect, the bill would return to the procedure that existed before P.L. 109-461
became law and permit representation only after the BVA renders a final decision in
the case.
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
Sometimes a veteran may not agree with the VA’s initial decision concerning
an award or the amount of the benefit.49 Within the VA, there is an extensive
appeal/review process that concludes with the decision of the Board of Veterans
Appeals (BVA).50 Final decisions of the BVA may be appealed to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC).51 The CAVC is an independent court,
separate and apart from the VA. The CAVC does not hold trials, hear witness
testimony, or receive new evidence.52 In deciding a case, the CAVC considers the
BVA decision, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the record that was considered
by the VA and made available to the BVA.53
The veteran who is appealing to the CAVC may represent himself or herself or
may be represented by an attorney or an authorized representative.54 VA’s Office of
General Counsel represents the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the VA before the
CAVC.55 Following a final decision of the CAVC, that decision may be appealed to
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”)56 by either the
veteran or the VA. Appeals to the Federal Circuit are required to be filed within 60
days of the final CAVC decision.57 Following a final decision by the Federal Circuit,
either the veteran or the VA may petition the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari, or
review, of that decision within 90 days of the Federal Circuit’s final action.58
49
See CRS Report RL33704, Veterans Affairs: The Appeal Process for Veterans’ Claims,
by Douglas Reid Weimer.
50
See CRS Report RL33704, Veterans Affairs: The Appeal Process for Veterans’ Claims,
by Douglas Reid Weimer.
51
See CRS Report RS22561, Veterans Affairs: The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans
Claims — Judicial Review of VA Decision Making, by Douglas Reid Weimer.
52
38 U.S.C. § 7261.
53
See CRS Report RS22561, Veterans Affairs: The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans
Claims — Judicial Review of VA Decision Making, by Douglas Reid Weimer.
54
Representation before the court is governed by U.S. Vet. App. R. 46.
55
38 U.S.C. § 7263(a).
56
Id. § 7292.
57
28 U.S.C. § 2107.
58
38 U.S.C. § 7292(c). A petition for certiorari requests the Supreme Court to review the
decision of the lower court. The Court has broad discretion in deciding which cases it
chooses to review.
CRS-21
Congress has been concerned about the CAVC’s backlog of cases and the
overall length of time needed to process an appeal through the VA and then through
the CAVC.59 An additional, related concern is the hardship experienced by those
veterans who are not receiving any benefits while their appeals are pending. In
response to these concerns, the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs held hearings
on the CAVC and the backlog on July 13, 2006,60 during which it was reported that
there was a backlog of more than 5,800 cases. Among the issues discussed was the
possible recall of retired CAVC judges to help reduce the backlog.61 Following the
hearing, two retired judges were recalled to process or decide more cases through the
system. After the recall term of these two judges ended, two other retired judges
were recalled. At the present time, no judges are serving in recall status. With more
appeals being filed each month, it is anticipated that the CAVC will continue to have
a heavy workload.
S. 1289 (introduced by Senator Larry Craig) would amend Title 38 of the U.S.
Code to modify the salary and the terms of the judges of the CAVC. The bill would
also modify the recall provisions for retired CAVC judges and other matters relating
to the CAVC.
S. 1315 (introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka), whose Title V is substantially
similar to S. 1289,62 would make the following changes concerning the CAVC:
!
!
!
!
!
Eliminate the restriction on the number of days per year that a retired
CAVC judge may voluntarily serve in recall status;
Modify the retirement pay structure for future CAVC judges;
Exempt retired CAVC judges from involuntary recall after they had
served a total of five years of recall service;63
Modify the CAVC’s authority to impose certain registration fees;64
Require the court to submit an annual report summarizing its
workload to the Senate and House Committees on Veterans’
Affairs;65 and
59
As all claims and appeals are different, it has not been possible to determine the “average”
length of an appeal through the VA and CAVC process.
60
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Battling the Backlog Part II:
Challenges Facing the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, 109th Cong., 2nd sess.,
July 13, 2006, S.Hrg. 109-694, available at [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc
.cgi?dbname=109_senate_hearings&docid=f:29716.pdf].
61
Id. The judges would be “recalled” to serve on the court in their retirement.
62
U.S. Congress. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Veterans Benefits Enhancement
Act of 2007, 110th Cong., 1st sess., August 29, 2007, S.Rept. 110-148, available online at
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f
:sr148.110.pdf].
63
S. 1315, § 501.
64
Id. § 502.
65
Id. § 503.
CRS-22
!
Require the General Services Administration (GSA) to provide
Congress with a report on the expansion of the CAVC’s office
space.66
S. 1315, which was reported by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept.
110-148) on August 29, 2007, was passed by the Senate on a 96-1 vote on April 24,
2008. The House passed an amended version of S. 1315 by a voice vote on
September 22, 2008.
S. 2640 (introduced by Senator Richard Burr) contains provisions similar to
those in S. 1289 and S. 1315. Title V of S. 2640 deals with the recall of CAVC
judges and their pay structure;67 discretion in the imposition of practice and
registration fees;68 an annual report on the CAVC’s workload to Congress;69 and a
report to Congress by the GSA on the expansion of facilities for the CAVC.70
H.R. 4084 (introduced by Representative John Hall) contains some provisions
similar to those in S. 1315. H.R. 4084 would require the CAVC to submit an annual
report summarizing its workload to Senate and House Committees on Veterans’
Affairs71 and would also require the General Services Administration to provide
Congress with a report on the expansion of the CAVC’s office space.72 The
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs of the House
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs held hearings on H.R. 4084 on November 8, 2007.
S. 2091 (introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka) would amend Title 38 of the U.S.
Code to increase the number of the CAVC’s active judges from seven to nine.
S. 2737 (introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka) would amend Title 38 of the U.S.
Code to grant jurisdiction to the CAVC to review compliance of ratings for
disabilities under the schedule of 38 U.S.C. § 1151 with the statutory requirements
applicable to entitlement to disability compensation.
H.R. 5892 (introduced by Representative John Hall) would amend Title 38 of
the U.S. Code to require an annual report on the workload of the CAVC.73 The bill
would also modify the CAVC’s jurisdiction and the finality of its decisions.74 The
House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs reported H.R. 5892 (H.Rept. 110-789) on
July 29, 2008, and the House passed the bill on a 429-0 vote on July 30, 2008.
66
Id. § 504.
67
S. 2640, § 501.
68
Id. § 502.
69
Id. § 503.
70
Id. § 504.
71
H.R. 4084, § 4.
72
Id. § 5.
73
H.R. 5892, § 201.
74
Id. § 202.
CRS-23
S. 3023 (introduced by Senator Daniel Akaka) would increase the number of
active judges on the CAVC to nine, require the CAVC to prescribe rules regarding
the privacy and security of court documents, and repeal the limit on service of
recalled retired judges who voluntarily serve more than 90 days. The bill would also
require an annual report to Congress regarding the CAVC’s workload. S. 3023 was
reported by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (S.Rept. 110-449) on
September 9, 2008. The bill was passed by the Senate by unanimous consent on
September 16, 2008, and by the House by a voice vote on September 24, 2008.
S. 3419 (introduced by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton) would require that the
CAVC prepare and submit an annual workload report to Congress. The bill would
also modify the jurisdiction and finality of the decisions of the CAVC.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.