[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 1288, H.R. 1494, H.R. 1623, H.R. 1809, H.R.
2086, H.R. 2138, H.R. 2189, H.R. 2341, H.R. 2382 AND H.R. 2423
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS
of the
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FRIDAY, JUNE 28, 2013
__________
Serial No. 113-27
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
82-243 WASHINGTON : 2014
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine, Ranking
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida Minority Member
DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee CORRINE BROWN, Florida
BILL FLORES, Texas MARK TAKANO, California
JEFF DENHAM, California JULIA BROWNLEY, California
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey DINA TITUS, Nevada
DAN BENISHEK, Michigan ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas RAUL RUIZ, California
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD, California
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
PAUL COOK, California TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana
Helen W. Tolar, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado DINA TITUS, Nevada, Ranking
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida Minority Member
MARK AMODEI, Nevada BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
PAUL COOK, California RAUL RUIZ, California
GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD, California
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
__________
June 28, 2013
Page
Legislative Hearing On H.R. 1288, H.R. 1494, H.R. 1623, H.R.
1809, H.R. 2086, H.R. 2138, H.R. 2189, H.R. 2341, H.R. 2382 And
H.R. 2423...................................................... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Hon. Jon Runyan, Chairman, Disability Assistance and Memorial
Affairs........................................................ 1
Prepared Statement of Hon. Runyan............................ 25
Hon. Dina Titus, Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on
Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs..................... 2
Prepared Statement of Hon. Titus............................. 25
Hon. Jeff Miller, Chairman, Full Committee, Veterans' Affairs,
U.S. House of Representatives.................................. 3
Prepared Statement of Chairman Miller........................ 26
Hon. Gloria Negrete McLeod, U.S. House of Representatives........ 4
Hon. Paul Cook, U.S. House of Representatives.................... 6
Hon. Beto O'Rourke, U.S. House of Representatives................ 6
WITNESSES
Hon. G.K. Butterfield, U.S. House of Representatives (NC-01)..... 8
Prepared Statement of Hon. Butterfield....................... 27
Executive Summary of Hon. Butterfield........................ 28
Hon. Christopher Gibson, U.S. House of Representatives (NY-19)... 9
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gibson............................ 29
Executive Summary of Hon. Gibson............................. 29
Hon. Kevin McCarthy, U.S. House of Representatives (CA-23)....... 18
Prepared Statement of Hon. McCarthy.......................... 30
Verna Jones, Director, Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation
Commission, The American Legion................................ 11
Prepared Statement of Ms. Jones.............................. 31
Alexander Nicholson, Legislative Director, Iraq and Afghanistan
Veterans of America............................................ 13
Prepared Statement of Mr. Nicholson.......................... 35
Heather Ansley, Esquire., MSW, Vice President of Veterans Policy,
VetsFirst, a program of United Spinal Association.............. 15
Prepared Statement of Ms. Ansley............................. 39
Executive Summary of Ms. Ansley.............................. 44
Thomas Murphy, Director, Compensation Service, U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs............................................... 22
Accompanied by:
Richard Hipolit, Assistant General Counsel, U.S. Department
of Veterans Affairs
STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD
Hon. Thomas J. Rooney............................................ 45
Disabled American Veterans (DAV)................................. 46
Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA).............................. 51
J. Don Horton.................................................... 53
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 1288, H.R. 1494, H.R. 1623, H.R. 1809, H.R.
2086, H.R. 2138, H.R. 2189, H.R. 2341, H.R. 2382 AND H.R. 2423
Friday, June 28, 2013
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance
and Memorial Affairs,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:34 a.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jon Runyan
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Runyan, Cook, Titus, O'Rourke, and
Negrete McLeod.
Also Present: Representative Miller.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN RUNYAN
Mr. Runyan. Good morning, this legislative hearing on H.R.
1298, H.R. 1494, H.R. 1623, H.R. 1809, H.R. 2086, H.R. 2138,
H.R. 2189, H.R. 2341, H.R. 2382 and H.R. 2423 will now come to
order.
Today, we have a large number of bills before us and there
is a high level of interest in the policy areas that they
address, particularly the backlog of disability benefits
claims. Therefore, in the interest of time, I will forego a
lengthy opening statement and just briefly touch upon on one
bill on today's agenda, which I am the author of, H.R. 2423.
The Disabled Veterans Access to Medical Examinations
Improvement Act has three main objectives.
First, the bill would extend the authority of the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs to enter into contracts with private
physicians to conduct medical disability evaluations.
With the passage of this bill the successful program
allowing physicians outside of the VA to conduct contract
examinations would continue for an additional three years
through 2016.
This would allow VA more quickly to evaluate the veteran's
disability and facilitate the access to the care they need.
Second, this bill would also extend the license portability
to contract examination providers, meaning that physicians with
an active state license may provide C&P examinations in another
state because they are working on behalf of the Federal
government.
Although the VA and DoD already provide licensed
portability for physicians working directly for them, this
authority is not extended to contract examination providers.
This provision is designed to facilitate the C&P exam
process by allowing the contract physicians the flexibility to
travel and assist in areas that are experiencing lengthy delays
in scheduling examinations.
Finally, this piece of legislation would also expand the
number of regional offices allowed to utilize contract
examinations from ten to fifteen.
In addition, this would require the secretary to determine
which regional offices would benefit most from the use of the
contract examinations by performing data analysis of the
backlog and disability examination wait times.
C&P examinations are a key component of the disability
claims process, therefore expanding the authority and scope of
the contract examination process merits consideration.
It is my hope that veterans more quickly receive the
necessary medical evidence for their claim. This will cut down
the overall development and processing time, resulting in a
faster issuance of a final decision.
Again, in the interest of time, I would like to reiterate
my request that today's witness abide by the decorum and the
rules of this hearing and summarize your statement in five
minutes or less during our oral testimony. We have a large
number of bills on the agenda today, and I want to make sure
everybody is heard in a timely manner.
I would also remind everybody present and without any
objection your written testimony will be made part of the
hearing record.
I appreciate everyone's attendance and I now call on
Ranking Member, Ms. Titus, for her opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Runyan appears in the
Appendix]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DINA TITUS
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for being
late and I will follow your example. I also want to thank you
for your continued leadership on these issues facing our
veterans and thank you for this hearing.
We do have a number of bills. I would just highlight a
couple that are addressing the backlog, which we have heard so
much about from my colleagues who are present today.
On the agenda is H.R. 1623, which is the VA Claims
Efficiency Through Information Act of 2013. This is brought to
us by Representative McLeod of the DAMA Subcommittee. H.R. 1623
requires the VA to track time that is spent evaluating each
type of medical condition in a veterans disability claim and
the performance of each regional office in handling those
claims.
Information is always key and it gives us strength in
making better policy. So understanding which medical conditions
consume the most time to process will help us understand the
agencies backlog and then shape procedures that can help
expedite the progress of a claim.
It would also ensure that the VBA builds in detailed
measures which will, ultimately, lead to gains in efficiency,
again, for better understanding and addressing the backlog.
Next we have H.R. 1809, known as the Faster Filing Act.
This is proposed by Representative O'Rourke, also of the DAMA
Subcommittee.
This bill would help encourage and educate veterans about
the various methods that may increase the timeliness of their
claims, such as utilizing the new fully developed claims
program.
The fully developed claims program will not only help
reduce the backlog significantly, but it will also allow
veterans to do their claims in appropriate time period and then
get an extra year of benefits as an incentive.
So, this will encourage veterans to utilize the approach
that gets them through faster.
Finally, my own bill, H.R. 2086, the Pay As You Rate bill,
would require the VA to pay for medical conditions as they are
adjudicated in the electronic system.
Currently, veterans typically receive payment when all the
medical conditions within a claim are fully addressed and
adjudicated. This legislation would pay as you rate. It would
require the VA to pay veterans on individual medical conditions
as each one is adjudicated, so you would get paid at a faster
rate and at least get a little bit of money before you have to
go through the whole process.
We know that veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan
average 8.5 different conditions in their claims. Some of these
are complex and time consuming, but some are simpler and can be
addressed in a more timely fashion.
We believe the VA should compensate veterans for these
simpler parts of their claim as early as possible while
continuing to work on the more difficult ones.
These just seem like common sense approaches and I hope Mr.
Chairman, working together, we can move these bills to the
floor as quickly as possible.
We all are concerned about the backlog. We want to get rid
of all those mountains of paper and have a more efficient
effective system and help our RA's address our veterans claims
as quickly as possible, because that's what they deserve. Thank
you and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Dina Titus appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Gentle Lady, and I know just about
every Member in the room wants to speak on a bill, so we will
get this moving. I yield to Chairman Miller for his statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JEFF MILLER
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
it and I, too, will make my statement as brief as possible.
H.R. 2189 establishes a commission or a task force basically to
handle, hopefully, the issue as it relates to the disability
claims backlog and I think everybody in this room is very
familiar that VA has, in fact, brain stormed over recent weeks
trying to get a handle on the claims that are out there today
and I do hope as well as each Member of this Committee that, in
fact, their efforts are successful. But I think the pattern
that we have seen of starting new initiative after new
initiative after new initiative is just not really the way to
handle the situation that is presented before us right now.
I think what we need is an outside independent analysis to
clearly identify, first, why the backlog exists and even as
important, if not more so, to prevent the backlog from ever
occurring again.
If we don't know where we have been, how are we going to
get where we are going, so to say? And so, I would say that by
assembling this team it would help work towards VA's goal in a
fresh and renewed pattern, if possible.
Recommendations would be made. Team members would be
appointed by Congress, the President, and would be represented
by folks from the Department of Veterans Affairs. I would say
that they would pull a perspective from the veterans service
organizations community, as well as private-sector leaders in
their fields of expertise including claims processing,
logistics and product tracking.
Finally, the bill would require an initial report on the
group's progress and then a final report being done 180 days
within final implementation of this particular law. And I have
heard some people say that this is unnecessary and I would just
say, it is an opportunity really. It is necessary. It is not
going to be a delay tactic by any stretch of the imagination
and, in fact, VA has made some progress on the backlog out
there.
We have all heard about it, read about it in the news, but
the overall processing times still remain well over the
department's 2015 goal. Even with the improvement, VA has shown
65 percent of the claims that exist out there today are still
in a backlog situation.
So, I think now is not the time to take the foot off the
gas. We need to continue moving forward. I would say that this
is not different from VA's recent decision to work claims that
were pending in excess of two years. This was not originally a
part of the VA plan. They did a course correction and I think
that it has produced some valuable time saving on those folks.
I would say, again, it would irritate me if I were a
veteran that had had a claim for two or three years pending and
then all of a sudden, miraculously, within 30 days my claim was
adjudicated. We need to find out why it sat there for so long.
So, again, to my colleagues, I would encourage all of you
to support H.R. 2189. It's a bill to establish a commission or
task force to evaluate the backlog of disability claims at VA.
And with that I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Miller appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. I thank the Chairman for that and I will
recognize Ms. McLeod for her statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD
Ms. Negrete McLeod. Thank you, Mr. Chairman Runyan and
Ranking Member Titus. With your permission, I would like to
make a few remarks on H.R. 1623. Each year as veterans apply
for disability benefits through the VA, the number of medical
conditions and their compensation claims increase. This is
because more veterans are surviving war injuries and older
veterans are having more health challenges as they age.
A condition related to PTSD is very different than one
related to hearing loss. Staff at the Veterans Benefit
Administration do not always have the expertise with the very
different conditions. Therefore, if any single medical
condition in a claim is incorrectly evaluated, the entire claim
is delayed from receiving a decision.
This prevents the VA from processing claims in a timely
manner and contributes to the backlog. The public has no
information on how many claims include PSD traumatic
amputations from IEDs or heart disease as medical conditions.
The VA and Congress cannot sufficiently insure that offices
at the Veterans Benefits Administration have the knowledge base
necessary to process disability claims unless this information
is publicly available and regularly updated.
The lack of public statistics about the claims backlog does
the VA and veterans a disservice in demonstrating the progress
being made and setting the VA on a path to reduce the number of
outstanding claims.
All that is seen at the VA's Monday morning workload report
is a number of pending claims. No data showing the number of
completed claims for the previous month or year is available.
Nor is the progress shown that is being made at the regional
office given during any month or week.
The VBA's recent efforts to reduce the claims backlog
through clearing out the oldest cases is admirable, but this is
not a long term solution to providing veterans the compensation
they earned while serving our country.
H.R. 1623 is one part of the solution. It provides
processing of claims by requiring VBA to track the time spent
evaluating every medical condition in a disability compensation
claim. It improves the efficiency of regional offices by
requiring the VBA to report the monthly and weekly performance
in processing claims.
I applaud the VA's recent decision to move more information
about the accuracy of rating disability claims and the average
number of days a claim is pending at each of its regional
offices.
Beyond the requirements already enacted by the VA, H.R.
1623 would require the VA to report the number of completed
claims by region and by medical condition for the current and
preceding month and year. This information will be reported and
updated weekly on its Web site.
Each month, veterans suffer economic hardships from delays
in their disability benefits. If we knew how many claims were
completed from month to month and which offices were struggling
to process particular medical conditions, the VA could quickly
direct resources to address the problem and Congress would have
a better understanding how the VA allocates funding between
regional offices. And that would assist them in receiving
benefits to those who need it the most.
Some concerns have been raised about how these reporting
requirements create more work for the VA. However, all efforts
for the veterans who serve our country should be taken.
This bill has the support of the Iraq and Afghanistan
Veterans of America and the Association of the United States
Navy.
The bill's goal is to work with the VA and its employees,
many of whom are veterans. We look forward to H.R. 1623 to be
part of ending the claims backlog. Thank you and I yield back.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Gentle Lady. With that, Mr. Cook.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL COOK
Mr. Cook. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. H.R. 2382, The
Prioritizing Urgent Claims for Veterans Act gives priority
status to claims submitted by veterans who are most in need of
VA services.
This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to
give priority status and process claims immediately when filed
by veterans who meet any of the following conditions: veterans
who have reached the age of 70, veterans who are terminally
ill, or veterans with life threatening illnesses.
The intent of this legislation is to give priority to
veterans who have urgent needs. And to the veterans in the
military that are listening to this, it is almost analogous to
combat situations when somebody is wounded and medevaced. And
when they are medevaced they go to a casualty clearings station
or a ship or what have you, they prioritize the triage system
and sometimes somebody who has, you know, maybe shrapnel in the
back or something like that, which is serious but it is not a
sucking chest wound or somebody that is not missing their right
arm or right leg or have head injuries, they have to make that
decision.
The system is backed up and people that have served in
Vietnam, Korea, even World War II, they are reaching that age
where--and I am one of them, where we have the impression that
hey, if it is going to take a year and a half, why bother?
And if you are going to take care of us and those that have
served in those situations, I think you have to have a priority
of that.
Somebody who is terminal, obviously, that is very, very
difficult to everybody, the services that would be rendered
would be much, much different than, of course, life threatening
illnesses.
This is not designed to limit status to these three
categories. In fact, we talked to the staff, actually look for
amendments that apply to veterans with good cause, but we want
to insure priority for these groups.
I am looking forward to working with my colleagues in the
DAV to identify other potential groups that would merit
priority status before the mark up.
Until the claims backlog is resolved, I think we have got
to make it a priority to care for those veterans who are in
need of those benefits they earned while serving their Nation.
And I especially want to thank Congresswoman Gloria Negrete
McLeod for co-sponsoring this important piece of legislation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Gentleman. And I will recognize Mr.
O'Rourke now.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BETO O'ROURKE
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to speak
on the issue of resolving this problem that we have with
disability claims backlog at the VBA and H.R. 1809 or the
Faster Filing Act, seeks to help resolve this problem.
The veterans whom I serve in El Paso are waiting on average
480 days to have their claims resolved and the regional office
that is processing those claims is in Waco, Texas.
Last week I got to visit Waco, spent some time with the
Director, John Limpose, was joined by the Deputy Under
Secretary for VBA, Diana Rubens, and we actually walked through
this enormous facility that is processing all these claims for
more than half the State of Texas, including El Paso.
And it really struck home some of the problems that we have
there. As we were turning a corner to go down another hallway,
we were almost run over by a gentleman pushing a hand truck
that had a stack of paperwork that was four or five feet high
and that was one veteran's claim.
So it is clear that we have to do everything we can to help
the VA transition into a digital format. It is going to make it
far easier to resolve these claims, to process them and to do
so in a very effective, efficient manner and in a way that is
far more accurate than we are doing today.
So, the Faster Filing Act requires the VA to track and post
the average turnaround time for the different manners in which
a veteran can file a claim from the fastest, which is a fully
developed claim filed online, to the slowest, which is one that
could perhaps be scrawled on the back of a napkin and submitted
to the VA, which they would be required to accept and process.
It also requires the VA to remind veterans that if they
file a fully developed claim between August 6th of this year
and August 6th of 2015, that veteran is entitled to an extra
year's worth of benefits.
So, not only will they have their claim resolved more
quickly than the traditional method, they can have that claim
resolved in under 100 days versus 480 days on average for El
Paso, but they will get an extra year's worth of benefits.
And we want to make sure and actually require through this
bill that the VA publish that information, make it available to
veterans as they are filing, help VSOs make that information
available to veterans.
It costs us nothing to do this. It enjoys bipartisan
support. It makes a lot of common sense. And I want to thank
Mr. Cook and the supporters that we have in the Senate, Senator
Heinrich and Senator Heller who joined us on a letter to the VA
asking the VA just to implement this bill without having to
make it law, because it, again, seems like a common sense
solution. Something that should be easy enough for them to do
and something that doesn't cost any money.
So, hopefully, we will have the support of this Committee
and if the VA does not act on the recommendations, we can make
this law in the near future. And with that I yield back. Thank
you.
Mr. Runyan. Thank the Gentleman, and at this time I would
like to welcome my colleagues from the House who are sitting at
the witness table, and first we will hear from the Honorable
G.K. Butterfield from North Carolina who is sponsoring H.R.
1288 and then we will hear from the Honorable Chris Gibson from
New York who is sponsoring H.R. 1494.
And we are expecting arrival of Honorable Kevin McCarthy
from California who is sponsoring 2138 and will be joining us
following a prior commitment.
Thank you all for accommodating the vote schedule and I
would like to welcome you to this legislative hearing and your
complete written statements will be entered into the hearing
record and with that, Congressman Butterfield, we will start
with you and you are now recognized for your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. G.K. BUTTERFIELD
Mr. Butterfield. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and to
the Ranking Member and other Subcommittee Members. Thank you so
very much for allowing me the opportunity to testify today in
support of my bill, H.R. 1288, the World War II Merchant
Mariner Service Act.
Seeing this bill signed into law is a personal priority and
I am hopeful that this hearing signals that I am one step
closer to achieving that goal on behalf of World War II
Merchant Mariners.
As this Subcommittee certainly knows insuring that
individuals who sacrifice so much in service to our country,
receive the recognition they deserve is one of the most
important jobs that we have as Members of Congress.
For the past three congresses, I have led a strong
bipartisan effort to recognize individuals that served our
country during World War II in the Merchant Marines.
In this Congress I am, again, joined by a strong bipartisan
coalition of, at present, 84 co-sponsors in support of this
bill.
Five of the bill's co-sponsors are Members of this
Committee including Full Committee Ranking Member, Mr. Michaud.
And I thank each of them for their support.
Passing this bill, Mr. Chairman, is the right thing to do
and now is the right time to do it. The bill is very simple. It
would expand the types of documentation accepted by the Federal
Government when a very small group of Mariners that operated
tugboats and barges domestically during the war apply for
veteran status.
Once they are recognized Mr. Chairman, as a veteran, they
would be provided benefits limited only to burial and a U.S.
flag.
And let me repeat that, qualifying Merchant Mariners who
can prove service through expanded acceptable documentation
would receive only burial benefits and the honor of being
recognized by their country for their sacrifice and service,
period.
My bill does not provide for health coverage or disability
payments or payouts of any kind to Merchant Mariners who served
during the war and it does not impact direct spending.
Currently, the required documents to satisfactorily prove
service no longer exist or can be extremely hard to find. I
have included documents in my submitted testimony that
demonstrate that many of these necessary documents actually no
longer exist or they never existed, largely because of
decisions by the Government over several decades and I ask now
that they be included in the record.
As a veteran of the U.S. Army, myself, it is important to
note that this bill takes nothing away from the men and woman
who have served and continue to serve our country in
traditional ways. It does not diminish the importance of their
sacrifices and does not reduce the esteem in which we all hold
veterans of our traditional armed forces.
These Mariners have gone unrecognized, Mr. Chairman, for
more than 70 years. They deserve to be recognized for their
service because they too helped to protect our great Nation.
My bipartisan bill has been scored by the CBO to have a
insignificant and de minimis effect on direct spending over a
ten year period. Estimates show that fewer than 2,000 of these
Mariners are still living, less than 2,000. In fact, it is very
possible that there are only hundreds left today.
We are quickly running out of time to recognize these few
remaining Americans that stood up for freedom and democracy
when we needed them the most.
Without weapons or formal training, these individuals
risked their lives and tragically too many gave their lives
defending our country. For those that are still living, and
there are some in my district, we must not let their efforts
and contributions go unrecognized while we still have a chance
to do it.
Finally, the passing of Senator Lautenberg, from New
Jersey, the last remaining World War II veteran in the Senate,
is a strong reminder to all of us in Congress that if we are to
honor and recognize these Mariners, the time to do so is now.
And so I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Ranking Member
and all of my colleagues for yielding time today to allow me to
make this statement in support of my bill. Thank you so very
much.
[The prepared statement of Hon. G.K. Butterfield appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Congressman Butterfield. And with
that, Congressman Gibson, you are now recognized for five
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER GIBSON
Mr. Gibson. Well, thank you. I would like to begin by
thanking you, Mr. Chairman, the Ranking Member and all the
distinguished Members of the Committee and as a veteran myself,
I greatly appreciate all these bills that I have heard from
this morning. I think they are going to make a difference.
And I appreciate the opportunity to come before the
Committee to discuss H.R. 1494, the Blue Water Navy Ship
Accountability Act. An important bill designed to help our Blue
Water Navy Vietnam veterans.
During the Vietnam War our Government sprayed 20 million
gallons of herbicide Agent Orange to remove jungle foliage from
the Vietnam terrain. Agent Orange contains dioxin, a toxic
chemical residue found in locations where Agent Orange was used
or stored.
The U.S. Government has since linked dioxin to harmful or
serious medical conditions effecting those who served in or
around Vietnam, including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, prostate and
other cancers, Type II Diabetes and Parkinson's Disease.
Recognizing the debt owed to veterans who were exposed to
Agent Orange, Congress passed and President George H. W. Bush
signed into law the Agent Orange Act of 1991.
The 1991 law empowered the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
declare certain illnesses to be presumed to have been caused by
exposure to Agent Orange and enabled Vietnam veterans to
receive disability compensation for related conditions.
However, in 2002 the VA limited the scope of these
presumptive illnesses covered within the act to only those
veterans who could provide proof that they had boots on the
ground in Vietnam.
Boots on the ground encompassed land forces and the
Riverine or as commonly called, the Brown Water Navy. As a
result, veterans who served in the waters off the coast of
Vietnam, commonly called Blue Water veterans, were forced to
file individual claims with the VA to restore their benefits.
The VA has denied almost 33,000 such claim since 2009.
Under current law, Blue Water Navy veterans who do not set foot
in Vietnam or serve aboard ships that operated in the inland
waterways of Vietnam between January 9, 1962 and May 7, 1975
have the burden of proof to demonstrate exposure of Agent
Orange and the connection to their illnesses. These claims are
decided on a case by case basis.
The Bureau of Veteran Affairs maintains a list of U.S. Navy
and Coastguard ships that operated within the vicinity of
Vietnam. Some offshore vessels docked to the shore of Vietnam,
operated in Vietnam's close coastal waters and sent smaller
vessels ashore or conducted operations in the inland waterways
of Vietnam.
Current VA policy for when a veteran files an Agent Orange
exposure related claim requires the VA regional offices to
forward a request for such to the Department of Defenses Army
and Joint Services Records Research Center and evidence
confirmed through military records must show that the veteran
was aboard one of these ships that operated close to or in the
shore in order to receive benefits. However, this list is
imperfect and it is not comprehensive.
Our Vietnam veterans should not be made to wait any longer
than necessary to receive their benefits. My bill would direct
the JSRRC to do a comprehensive search to determine which ships
are eligible for coverage under current law, reducing the wait
time when new claims are filed.
This would help veterans who are currently sick or in some
cases have died and claims are being made by their surviving
families. Passage of this bill will alleviate some of the
current VA claims backlog our veterans are facing by
practically determining what we know today rather than waiting
until tomorrow when claims are made.
In closing, I would like to also point out that the
Congressional Budget Office has indicated that H.R. 1494 will
have no significant cost and the bill enjoys support of major
veterans organizations, such as the American Legion, the
Veterans of Foreign War, the Military Officers Association of
America, the Military Coalition, the Vietnam Veterans
Association, the Association of the U.S. Navy and the Blue
Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Association.
Research has available documents to determine who is
eligible under current law to receive presumptive coverage for
exposure to Agent Orange.
So, I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Ranking Member
and I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Christopher Gibson appears
in the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Congressman Gibson. And I know
Congressman McCarthy is probably on his way, so we will
continue to move forward.
And also in the interest of time, we will forgo any
questions of this panel. If you do have any questions, please
submit them for the record.
On behalf of the Subcommittee, I want to thank you for your
testimony and you are now excused and I will ask the second
panel to come forward.
With this panel, first we will hear from Verna Jones,
Director of Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission at
the American Legion. Next, we will hear from Alexander
Nicholson who is the Legislative Director for Iraq and
Afghanistan Veterans of America and then we will hear from
Heather Ansley, Vice President of Veterans Policy with
VetsFirst.
Thank you all for being here today. All of your statements
will be entered into the record and, Ms. Jones, you are now
recognized for five minutes for your testimony.
STATEMENTS OF VERNA JONES, DIRECTOR OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND
REHABILITATION COMMISSION, THE AMERICAN LEGION; ALEXANDER
NICHOLSON, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR FOR IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN
VETERANS OF AMERICA; AND HEATHER ANSLEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF
VETERANS POLICY, VETSFIRST, A PROGRAM OF UNITED SPINAL
ASSOCIATION
STATEMENT OF VERNA JONES
Ms. Jones. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman, Ranking
Member and Members of this Committee. Thank you for inviting
the American Legion here this afternoon to express our views on
legislation being considered today.
A lot of these bills are created with the intent of helping
deal with the backlog and that is important. We have to do
something about it and I want to talk about that today.
I started out as a department service officer in North
Carolina helping veterans and for our service officers and the
over 2,600 accredited representatives of the American Legion
across the Nation, we deal with veterans everyday who come into
our office asking for help dealing with the disabilities they
acquired serving their country.
We see their faces, we know their stories, we feel their
pain. And it is easy to put a face with a problem when you have
that in your office every day.
I have had the opportunity since then to serve in various
capacities helping veterans and now I am the director of the
division of the American Legion that serves veterans across the
country, whether it is helping them with their disability
claims, to get benefits or their health care.
I keep the faces of those veterans in my heart every day. I
remember the very first veteran that I helped as a young
service officer. He came into my office and we were going to go
before a decision review officer because his claim had been
denied. He was an early 30 year old man and what I saw before
me was a man who looked twice that age because of his
disability from serving his country.
As we went in front of the decision review officer he
started to tell his story. He talked about while serving his
country he developed an illness and now he couldn't play with
his children or dance with his wife or do the things that he
thought a man should do for his family. He was unable to work.
He had to quit work because his disability was so severe and it
became dangerous for him to work.
And as he told his story, I became emotional. I couldn't
believe the person had endured such hardship. He stopped
talking to the DSO and said to me, ``don't cry for me, feel
happy for me, feel honored that I was able to serve my
country.'' And knowing what I know now, if I had to do it all
over again, I would still serve my country.
The doctor had told him two years prior to that that in
five years he would either be severely disabled or dead and he
died two years later before his benefits were awarded.
That is what I want you all to keep in mind as you consider
every bill that comes before you. Think of the faces and the
names of the people you know who served and keep them in mind
and ask, are we doing the right thing for them? Some answers
and decisions are so easy.
H.R. 1494, the Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act, it
is long passed time that we had a comprehensive list showing
which ships did what in Vietnam.
Let's get this done and make things easier for those
Vietnam veterans and for the VA as they work on those claims.
H.R. 2086, the Pay As You Rate Act, just helps the VA
raters do what they are already allowed to do, but may not
receive credit for it. And get some good news to the veteran
and grant some of their issues even if the others are going to
take a little while longer.
Let's get some help and some money flowing in the homes of
those veterans while they wait for the VA to rate the rest of
their claim to get it done right.
Other bills like H.R. 1623, H.R. 1809 are going to provide
more information, more information to the interested
stakeholder about the VA, how the VA is accomplishing their
goal. More information to the veterans about their options for
filing a claim. These things are only going to make the system
run better, more transparently and more efficiently.
The American Legion has been heavily involved in working
through the fully developed claims process. We've traveled the
country providing quality review visits and looking at the
quality of those FDC claims. And it is helping veterans.
It helps the veterans, it helps the VA get the information
that they need up front and a veteran can help cut months off
of their claim processing time.
We are already doing this in offices across the country and
I will tell you from my time there, it is working. We need to
get the word out to the veterans and H.R. 1809 is going to help
us do that.
We are all here because we want to help veterans. Whether
it is you in those chairs, whether it is the American Legion or
other VSOs or people here listening to us, we all want to help
the veteran. We are here because we want to get them some help
and get the claims done right.
Getting more information, more data out of the VA about how
that process is going is only going to help all of the
stakeholders in the process and make the right decisions about
how to help veterans.
It is going to help the veterans themselves make the right
decisions about how to use the process to get their claims done
promptly and accurately.
Again, I would like to thank the Committee for considering
these bills and for working hard to make sure that they are
helping to guide the system and to make it work for veterans.
And I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have
for me.
[The prepared statement of Verna Jones appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Ms. Jones. And with that I will now
recognize Mr. Nicholson for his testimony.
STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER NICHOLSON
Mr. Nicholson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ranking Member
Titus, good seeing you, Mr. Chairman, as well. Other
distinguished Members of the Committee, thanks for having us
here.
On behalf of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and
our 270,000 members and supporters, we are grateful for the
opportunity to offer our views and recommendations regarding
these pieces of legislation before the Subcommittee today.
As of this week, there are more than 800,000 claims pending
before the VA, over half a million of which are still
backlogged. But those who find themselves in need of benefits
and care from the VA are more than just numbers.
Each number represents a face, a person, a family and a
story. And to help bring these stories to light before
Congress, the media, and the American public, IAVA this week
has launched a new digital tool called The Weight We Carry,
which can be accessed and explored at theweightwecarry.org and
we would encourage each of you and your staff to take a moment
to look at this enlightening data visualization tool and use it
to find real stories of real constituents from your States and
your communities who are or were stuck in the backlog.
IAVA believes that all veterans must have access to quality
benefits, care, and related services. The men and women who
volunteer to serve in our Nation's military do so with the
explicit understanding that they and their families will be
cared for during their period of service and also after their
period of service should they sustain injuries or disability
while serving.
IAVA is therefore proud to offer our support for many of
the bills pending before this Subcommittee and that are the
subject of this hearing today.
I want to mention just a couple of bills in my oral remarks
today and focus on those, because as many of you know IAVA's
number one issue this year has been the backlog.
But before I do that I just wanted to mention the
Chairman's bill, the Disabled Veterans Access to Medical Exams
Improvement Act is one that we strongly support, because we
believe that the extension of this authority is smart. We
believe it is a proven tool that the VA can use to help it get
through more claims quicker and more efficiently and we would
even encourage the Committee to look at an extension of the
ability of regional offices to use this authority beyond the
ten or even the fifteen, that this would extend it to, to
potentially all regional offices.
I also wanted to mention Representative McCarthy's bill
briefly. The Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and
Accountability Act. We have certainly had some concerns about
the depth and substance behind the VA's backlog strategic plan
and we believe that this bill seems to address some of those
short comings that we and other VSOs have identified and have
shared our concerns about for quite some time.
But I want to focus mostly now on Chairman Miller's bill to
establish a commission or task force to evaluate the underlying
causes of the VA disability claims backlog.
The existence and work of this task force would in no way
impede the ongoing work of the VA to address problems that have
already been identified. And it would simply not just study the
matter from afar and issue a report years later. Instead, the
Chairman has smartly and carefully crafted this bill to insure
that the task force would augment and support the VA's ongoing
work, contribute more added value to this effort, report on its
findings early and often, and increase transparency throughout
the process.
The VA is certainly already working to address some of
these issues and the confidence deficit that has resulted
through these reforms such as moving to an all electronic
filing system, increasing access to information, increasing
staffing bandwidth and training, coordinating better with other
elements within the VA and communicating more efficiently and
effectively with DoD and other executive agencies.
All of these are welcome reforms, but even the VA admits
that there are still snags and challenges with which it needs
help.
The formation and existence of such a task force would
facilitate getting the VA that coordination and outside help
and would also be an important facilitator of looking ahead to
potential future challenges so that we do not wind up in this
unfortunate situation again, Mr. Chairman.
IAVA strongly supports this bill and stresses again that it
would in no way impede the good work and progress that the VA
is already making on the backlog. Instead, the resulting task
force would only help speed up that process and get the VA
information, resources, and expertise it needs to meet its
goals.
That is, after all, the common goal of IAVA, other military
and veterans service organizations, this Committee and the VA
itself.
Mr. Chairman, I will conclude there and thank you again for
this opportunity to offer our views before the Subcommittee.
[The prepared statement of Alexander Nicholson appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. And with that I will
recognize Ms. Ansley for her testimony.
STATEMENT OF HEATHER ANSLEY
Ms. Ansley. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
inviting VetsFirst to share our views today regarding the bills
that are the subject of the hearing.
My full testimony has been submitted for the record and I
will now limit my comments to just a few of the bills that are
before us today.
First, we support H.R. 1623. This legislation would require
VA to provide information regarding the processing times of
claims by regional office and by medical condition.
Although we support this legislation, we believe that the
information collected by condition would be more useful if it
included processing times for individual medical conditions by
regional office, and also for those medical conditions for
which most veterans seek compensation.
Second, we support H.R. 1809. This legislation would
require VA to provide veterans with information about
processing times and claims for which benefits are awarded.
We believe that providing veterans with the information
they need to make informed decisions about their benefits
claims is vital.
We do have concerns however about the need to acknowledge
receipt of information as part of submitting a claim for
benefits.
Third, we support H.R. 2086, this legislation would require
VA to make interim payments of disability benefits when an
issue is favorably decided for the veteran. We, again, urge
swift passage of this legislation.
Fourth, we support the intent of H.R. 2138. This
legislation would require VA to fully implement its strategic
plan for the elimination of the claims backlog. To ensure that
the goal is met, VA would be required to develop a supplemental
report that includes additional metrics and timelines for
implementing that plan. And also accountability from the
outside.
VetsFirst believes that VA must be held accountable for
meeting the goal of processing initial claims within 125 days
at 98 accuracy. Thus, we believe that requiring continuing
evaluations of metrics will show if progress is being made and
will be helpful in insuring that VA is pursuing correct
policies and procedures and making any course corrections that
are needed along the way.
We also believe, however, that the reporting requirements
must be carefully monitored to insure that the information
that's being collected is actually needed to facilitate and is
not diverting critical resources.
Fifth, H.R. 2189 would create a task force or commission to
study the claims backlog. We are concerned that a commission or
task force might hinder VA's current efforts by diverting
resources from the overall push to address the backlog.
However, VA must be held accountable for meeting its goal.
We do believe that a commission or task force that is
narrowly focused on the VA's current efforts related to the
backlog would have benefit for veterans and the claims process.
We also believe, however, that there is a need for a more
broad-based commission or task force that would thoroughly
evaluate the entire claims process, including the appeals
process.
Thus, we believe that a task force or a commission should
focus on either the backlog of the initial claims or the
broader claims process including the appeals, but not
necessarily both.
We would ask either that the legislation that has been
proposed be limited in scope or that the timeframes and focus
be broadened to include the many areas of concern.
Sixth, we support H.R. 2382. This legislation would require
the secretary to provide priority for veterans who are aged 70,
terminally ill, or who have life-threatening illnesses.
We strongly believe that statutory protections for our most
vulnerable veterans are necessary to insure that benefits are
available for those with heightened needs.
We would suggest, however, that this legislation be amended
to include those veterans who are homeless or who are suffering
severe financial hardship.
Seventh, we support H.R. 2423. This legislation would
extend VA's authorization to use contract physicians to perform
examinations for compensation exams.
And we support this legislation because it would not only
extend VA's authority, but would also allow VA to move
resources to where they are most needed.
Again, we thank you for the opportunity to share our views
today. This concludes my testimony and we would be happy to
answer any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Heather Ansley appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Ms. Ansley. And with that I will
begin the first round of questions and my first question is for
Mr. Nicholson. You touched on it a little bit in your statement
dealing with H.R. 2423.
You commented on expanding the ROs up to 15. Is there
anything else specifically dealing with contract examinations
we could do to help the process that you could think of?
Mr. Nicholson. Not off the top of my head, Mr. Chairman. I
would just stress the fact that the reason that I believe--you
know, we have evaluated the fact that expansion from ten to 15
and even perhaps beyond would be a good idea is because, you
know, one of the things we saw when the VA did its special
claims processing initiative on two year and older claims, was
that one of the factors that helped it get through so many
claims that were so old in such a small amount of time that had
languished for years, was increasing the capacity--essentially
increasing the capacity of the Veterans Health Administration
to tackle comp and pen exams.
You know, we heard that they were scheduling on evenings
and weekends, that they were really stepping up their
coordination with VHA, DBA that is, with VHA to get those comp
and pen exams done. So, that is why we think that anything that
would further increase the capacity of VHA to get to and
complete these comp and pen exams would drastically help with
the backlog issue. And I think that, you know, is one of the
things that sort of goes to show that and has proven that
outside of the effectiveness of the pilot study with the ten
regional offices already.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. And now on H.R. 2189, we know that
IAVA led the charge in calling for the independent commission
or task force to evaluate the current situation surrounding the
backlog of claims.
Can you elaborate on how you arrived at the conclusion that
this was necessary, and why you continue to believe it is the
best path forward?
Mr. Nicholson. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think the fundamental
point behind why we decided to push so hard on the commission
or task force to tackle the backlog issue is because, you know,
we have been dealing with promises on the backlog and on many
other issues from the VA for decades.
We have seen an exponential explosion in the number of
claims, for example, that are over the one year old, 2000
percent in a four or five year period.
We think it just rises to the level of a crisis and, you
know, while we certainly have faith in, to an extent, and trust
and are optimistic that the VA's leaders are moving in the
right direction, there certainly has been some positive
progress lately. We certainly encourage and applaud and
acknowledge and recognize that.
But there has been progress in the past that has slipped
back to where we are today.
Another fundamental reason, Mr. Chairman, is because this
problem is not just within the VA. It's currently being
handled, you know, just within the VA. This problem, though, I
think the VA will tell you itself, is largely dependent upon
cooperation from other agencies, especially the Department of
Defense, to get records not only for active duty but especially
regarding reserve members.
It's dependent the Social Security Administration and there
are lessons to be learned from outside of the Government
itself. I think the roundtable that Chairman Miller held a
couple of weeks ago with industry experts from the insurance
field as well as some tech industry experts, was enormously
helpful for the VA. I think the folks from the VBA who were
here participating in that, found that to be enormously helpful
and that's what this would do.
A commission or task force would bring together not only
members from--representatives from other Government agencies
but from outside of the Government, expertise from the tech
industry, from the insurance industry, et cetera, to assist the
VA, but not only solve the current backlog crisis, but make
sure it doesn't happen again.
And that is one of the reasons we have been pushing for
this so hard. We think the VA needs the help.
Mr. Runyan. Okay. I actually have a couple more questions
for the second round. I recognize Ms. Titus for her questions.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I would like to
say that I appreciate Ms. Ansley's comments about H.R. 2189 and
the need to look at the appeals process.
At a recent hearing I asked the question, aren't we going
to be facing a backlog with appeals as well as a backlog with
claims, especially as these claims are resolved that it is
likely to get worse, and the response was yes. But when I asked
what we were doing about it, they didn't have very many
specifics. So I think you're right that the Commission needs to
address both of those things.
My other question and it really is just kind of an
elaboration on a point that was made is to Ms. Jones. You said
in reference to the bill H.R. 2086 that I introduced, Pay As
You Rate, that this would put into legislation something that
they are already doing but aren't getting rewarded for.
Now, they have the authority to make interim payments, but
I would ask you just how often that really occurs? And if
employees aren't getting credit for that because it is not a
case being resolved, there is really no incentive for them to
do it, how can we change that process so they can get credit or
that we do make sure that it is happening?
Ms. Jones. Thank you. As I mentioned earlier, we conduct
quality review visits and along with fully developed claim
visits. As part of that process, we talk to employees and we
ask them questions about the work credit system and some claims
that they would rather rate and how they just go about day to
day business.
And from so many of those employees we hear that if they
can have, for instance, a four issue claim and they can't rate
all four of those issues, it is not likely that they are going
to rate one issue and defer three.
So, I think that one of the ways that we could help make
sure that doesn't happen is through a revamp of the work credit
system.
Almost every employee that we ask across the Nation, all
the ROs, we ask them if they think the work credit system is
fair, most people don't think that it's productive. They think
that it's counter-productive to what they are doing.
So, I think to re-look at the work credit system and make
it more conducive to being able to rate those claims and to do
what the Pay As You Rate Act supports, to rate a claim, get
some money going to those veterans and defer the other ones
until they can come back and properly rate those claims.
Ms. Titus. So, will you work with us to help us look at
revamping that work credit system?
Ms. Jones. Yes, ma'am. Absolutely.
Ms. Titus. Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, I yield
back.
Mr. Runyan. I thank the Gentle Lady. And now we have been
joined by Congressman McCarthy and we would like to recognize
him for five minutes to speak on his bill, H.R. 2138.
STATEMENT OF HON. KEVIN MCCARTHY
Mr. McCarthy. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
you holding this hearing today and providing me the opportunity
to testify in support of H.R. 2138, the Ending VA Claims
Disability BackLog and Accountability Act.
Every day the brave men and women of our Armed Forces risk
their lives to preserve our freedom and the American way of
life. We must honor those who have served when they are in need
and that is why Congress has continued to increase VA funding,
an uncommon occurrence in today's fiscal climate.
Yet, the VA continues to fail with the needs of our
veterans. With increasing frequency frustrated veterans, I
represent complaints to me about waiting months, even years for
a decision on their disability claims.
Even more frustrating is that when my own inquiries to the
VA of these cases are mostly ignored. So, I appreciate the help
of this Committee for working with me to request a GAO audit to
seek answers for our veterans.
The GAO audit confirmed our veterans' worst complaints,
that the VA is not processing disability claims in a timely
manner. Immediately, Chairman Miller and I called on the
Veterans Affairs Secretary to take swift action to implement
the GAO recommendations to help our veterans.
Unfortunately, when this Committee allowed me to question
VA Under Secretary for Benefits, Allison Hickey, during a
hearing, instead of acknowledging the problems identified by
the GAO, she rejected many of the audit's findings.
As I have repeatedly said, if the VA refuses to help our
veterans the House would. Today's hearing on H.R. 2138 and the
Chairman's bill H.R. 2189 and others, is keeping that promise
to our veterans and is another step in holding the VA
accountable.
My bill addresses the GAO identified factors that
contribute to the lengthy processing times of disability
claims, improves Congressional oversight of the VA's effort to
reduce the backlog and requires the VA to end the backlog by
Memorial Day 2015.
The bottom line is the current system is failing our
veterans, the very men and women who have served our country
and we know we can do better. We must end the backlog.
I am confident that the legislation being considered today
will help in this effort. That is why I thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for all of your effort.
I know this issue is a bipartisan issue and we want to
solve it together to make sure our veterans have all that they
need. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Kevin McCarthy appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. I thank the Gentleman for his testimony. And we
will resume--and you are welcome to leave, Congressman
McCarthy, if you want.
Mr. McCarthy. I thought you liked me.
Mr. Runyan. We do, but your colleagues left earlier so, we
kept that seat warm for you.
Mr. McCarthy. Well, you all have a nice 4th.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. And we resume the round of questions
with Ms. Negrete McLeod.
Ms. Negrete McLeod. I really don't have any questions.
Mr. Runyan. Okay, I actually have two more for this panel.
Ms. Ansley, dealing with H.R. 2382, could you think of any
additional categories that we might have to consider in this
piece of legislation beyond homeless veterans?
Ms. Ansley. Well, I think there is always a danger of
adding so many that no one becomes priority again, but I think
that at least bringing in the groups that VBA says it is
already giving priority to and also looking at what the Board
of Veterans Appeals does, which is to include the financial
hardship.
So, I think that those are cases that would at least be a
good point to start with. And perhaps, then, even requiring a
look back to see, how does that process work with those that
are being given priority? Are they moving more quickly? And
then are there other categories that we could add?
So, I think we can start with what we already know is
supposed to be working, whether it is Board of Veterans Appeals
or whether it is what VA is already prioritizing and then go
from there.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you.
Obviously, we have a lot of legislative ideas in front of
us today and they are aimed at reducing and ultimately
eliminating the backlog.
Which one of the ideas in front of us today do you think
will be the most effective in achieving this goal? Each? Ms.
Ansley? And you don't have to say my piece.
Ms. Ansley. Well, you just stole what I was going to say,
Chairman. No, I think that there are many wonderful things here
that could be done.
I think accountability is probably one of the most
important. I know you asked us for the most important, but I
would have to say it is a two part issue. It is accountability
for VA and making sure that they are reaching their goal of
meeting the backlog. But also making sure that our veterans
have the information that they need to make informed and
educated decisions. That is something that my organization, in
particular, is really promoting, is making sure veterans have
what they need.
So, I think that just as there is no one silver bullet that
is going to address any of these issues, I think that looking
at the most important thing is, what do our veterans need and
what does VA need? And it is accountability and information.
Mr. Runyan. Mr. Nicholson, you want to take a shot at it?
Mr. Nicholson. I would love to, Mr. Chairman. I think it
really depends on sort of what our goal is here. I mean, if our
goal is to continue to try to put band-aids on the issue and
maybe that is a rather crude way of characterizing it, but fix
the small problems along the way, then I would say there are
some that actually do accomplish that goal, that do fix
problems that have been identified and that need fixing. For
example, like I mentioned earlier, your bill, which would add
capacity for VHA to get to comp and pen claims so that VBA can
get those claims adjudicated quicker, I think would be
extremely helpful.
The Pay As You Rate Act, as well would get vets money
quicker and then more time could be taken on the other parts
that require more analysis.
But if we want a more comprehensive solution that is going
to go beyond just the quick fixes and try to look at how we can
solve this problem comprehensively and fundamentally for the
long term as well as the short term, then I would say the
Chairman's Commission bill is going to go that entire way in
doing that.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. Ms. Jones?
Ms. Jones. Thank you. They are all very important because
they all tend to fix or to help eliminate the backlog. If I had
to choose right now, 1809. Because 1809 gives the veteran
better information and it helps them recognize the benefits of
the fully developed claims.
And I have talked about that a little bit today because we
have been heavily involved in that. We've had the opportunity
to go around and to look to see what the service officers have
given to the VA and then what the VA is doing with that
information.
Throughout our quality review visits we have been able to
talk about fast letters and the directives that have been put
out to the VA employees and make suggestions and have them
understand a little bit better what is supposed to be done with
that information.
Veterans are getting paid more quickly through the FDC
program. We have seen claims that have been adjudicated in 30
days, 60 days, 90 days, 115 days and that is a lot better than
the traditional claims process.
And it gives the veteran an opportunity to take an active
part in getting their claim through the system. Give the VA
exactly what they need, get those claims back, awarded quickly
to the veteran so they can move on, have a better quality of
life, get the health care that they deserve, the benefits that
they have earned and not have it take so long.
It also helps the VA continue to move on more quickly with
the claims that don't fall under the fully developed claims
guideline. So 1809 is a very important piece of legislation
today.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. Any other Members have any other
questions? With that, thank you all for your testimony and you
are now excused and I will ask the third panel to come forward.
On this panel we will hear from Mr. Thomas Murphy, the
Director of Compensation Service with the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs, he is accompanied by Mr. Richard Hipolit, the
Assistant General Counsel with the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs.
I want to note that because this hearing came together in
short order and contains a large number of bills, VA's written
testimony was unable to be cleared by OMB in time for today's
hearing.
I want to emphasize that I appreciate VA's willingness to
be here today despite the fact that the agency's clear views
are not yet available. They will be submitted for the record
next week.
Accordingly, I want to make sure that we are all clear that
although VA will not be presenting oral remarks at today's
hearing, they are here to answer any technical questions to the
bills on the agenda today.
Any more substantive questions may be submitted for the
record. Once VA's cleared the written testimony, this will be
made available.
I would like to thank again, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Hipolit for
being here today and I will begin with some questions.
First, a question on H.R. 2382, which would legislate
certain priority groups for claims processing, including the
elderly and terminally ill veterans.
In addition to these veterans, what type of veterans does
the VA currently try to prioritize for claims processing?
STATEMENT OF THOMAS MURPHY
Mr. Murphy. The current priorities we have are Priority
Group Number 1, is Medal of Honor recipients, homeless
veterans, extreme financial hardships, terminally ill, and a
couple others that I can't recall off the top of my head.
But, the point is, many of the priorities that are called
out in this bill, those veterans are already in Priority Group
1.
Just let me put a little clarity around what exactly that
means. We are under a major push with the two year initiatives,
the one year initiative that is ongoing right now.
These claims in this category have priority over even that
work that comes in. So, these are the first cases that are
worked before we even go into the backlog issues of one year
and two year claims.
Mr. Runyan. Is it uniformly applied across all the ROs?
Mr. Murphy. I can't sit here and tell you that I guarantee
that 100 percent of the time it is complied at all times. We
are still in a manual/automated process and as we complete the
fielding and moving all claims into that, then I will be able
to answer that question with certainty.
Mr. Runyan. Can you generally discuss how the contract
examination process works at the ten regional offices where it
is currently in place?
Mr. Murphy. We are talking the contract exams----
Mr. Runyan. Yes.
Mr. Murphy. --conducted by our two--well, it is one
contractor--two contractors, excuse me. Yes. As an exam is
determined the need in order to complete under the regulations
and the law we determine an exam is needed and we have at the
regional office, we have the option of going down the route of
one of our suppliers or to VHA, depending on which is most
expeditious and there is also some ties back into the IDIS
process with that as well.
It is done direct from VBA's development, BSR, to that
contractor through our electronic systems, the exam is ordered
and then returned back directly to us.
We measure those for timeliness, for quality, accuracy, et
cetera.
Mr. Runyan. And you find the use of contract examinations
helpful?
Mr. Murphy. Yes. Yes, it is very helpful to us.
Mr. Runyan. We had a veteran recently contacted the
Committee and noted that he served on the U.S.S. William Pratt
during the Vietnam War. The gentleman noted that his ship as
well as the U.S.S. Halsey had been submitted to the VA to be
listed as the ships that operated in the territorial waters of
the Republic of Vietnam and he wanted to know what the process
is and how that request gets moved along to confirmation.
So, could you walk us through how the VA goes determining
whether a particular Navy ship from the Vietnam era served in
Blue Water or Brown Water.
Mr. Murphy. There is a process by which we determine, did
that ship enter into the Brown Water, up the rivers, the main
water streams or did it come in and actually dock or send
barges in with sailors on board those.
In that process we contact JESRIK. We give them a specific
window measured in months in a timeframe in that and JESRIK
will go in and do research on the deck logs and other
information in their possession and come back to us and confirm
yes or no, was that ship in that location at that time.
Once we receive that information, if it is confirmed that a
particular ship was there, we document it and maintain it on a
list, on a Web site and make that available to all raters so
that we don't have to go out and repeat that research the next
time when another veteran from that ship comes in.
So, we are capturing it. It is not a complete list by any
means of all ships in the Navy during the duration of the war
explaining when those ships were or were not on.
And we are being as wide as we can in our proof. We are
using, for example, this sailor that you are talking about, if
we had pictures of those that actually went ashore on a barge
and it shows them in Saigon Harbor, we use that to develop and
ask the right questions and record that that ship was, in fact,
or the sailors on that ship were, in fact, exposed to Agent
Orange on land in Vietnam. And then we capture that and record
that for use later.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. And I will now yield to the Ranking
Member, Ms. Titus, for her questions.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Murphy, you said
recently in a news story that the VA was at a tipping point in
regard to eliminating the backlog and I think the VA is
certainly doing a good job and making progress. So I commend
you all for that.
You also said that you should have the backlog completely
by the end of--or by 2015. Now, Mr. McCarthy's bill, H.R. 2138,
wants it to be completed by Memorial Day 2015. That's seven
months ahead of the end of the year. How do you feel about
that? Is that possible to do that seven months ahead or at what
point in 2015 did you mean when you said you could have it done
by then?
Mr. Murphy. I would have to stick with by 2015.
Ms. Titus. So, that would be by January 2015?
Mr. Murphy. That would be--let me rephrase that. I would
have to stick with in 2015.
Ms. Titus. So, in 2015 means by Memorial Day?
Mr. Murphy. I am sorry?
Ms. Titus. Could you do it by Memorial Day then?
Mr. Murphy. We are putting every effort we have got. Our
prime focus has got--everything we do is targeted at reducing
the backlog. Every effort, every dollar we spend is 125 days,
98 percent in 2015.
Ms. Titus. I know that and I appreciate that. I am just
concerned that in 2015 if you do it by Memorial Day that cuts
off seven months of 2015 and I don't know if you can get it
done by then.
Mr. Murphy. I don't know if we can either and that is why I
am saying that in 2015 we will fix the backlog.
Ms. Titus. Okay. My other question is going back to Ms.
Jones' statement about the work credit system. The VA can do
interim payments, but they are reluctant to do that because the
employees don't get any work credit for that.
Can you work with us now or will you commit to working with
us to revising that system so that will be an incentive for
people to get claims done? Or is that a problem for the VA?
Mr. Murphy. That is a very complex question to a very
complex situation in that----
Ms. Titus. Well, how about a simple answer to a complex
question? Yes or no?
Mr. Murphy. Yes, we would be happy to work with you on
exactly how we could look at and restructure the point system
for how we award points for work, with the intent being how do
you incentivize employees to work better, perform better, be
more efficient.
And we are, obviously, putting efforts into that today even
beyond what we are looking at here or what is in the bill and
in the language in here.
What we do need to keep in mind, that there is--we are in
the middle--this tipping point we are talking about has got
much to do with the fact that we are operating in two worlds,
paper environment and electronic environment and that the
scales are tipping very rapidly. That we will be very much in
the electronic world and very few in the paper world and as
that automation rolls out and develops further, we get much
more ability and much more clarity that we can look at and
drive accountability and performance with our management, with
our leadership, with our individual employees and place those
right kind of incentives that you are talking about here.
Ms. Titus. So, it is a little too early to measure kind
of--or come up with new sets of metrics, as everybody likes to
talk about now, for performance with the new system? Is that
kind of what you are telling me?
Mr. Murphy. And the general scope with the bill as I read
it here, the concept goes in the direction we are already
planning for and taking things to do and I think you said it
best when you said, it might be just a little bit too early for
that.
Ms. Titus. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Runyan. Okay. On behalf of the Subcommittee I would
like to thank you for your testimony and look forward to
working with you as your official positions become available to
us and you are now all excused.
I ask unanimous consent that all Members have five
legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
any extraneous material.
Hearing no objections, so ordered. I thank the Members for
their attendance today and this hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:47 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jon Runyan, Chairman
Good morning. This legislative hearing on H.R. 1288, H.R. 1494,
H.R. 1623, H.R. 1809, H.R. 2086, H.R. 2138, H.R. 2189, H.R. 2341, H.R.
2382 and H.R. 2423 will now come to order.
Today we have a large number of bills before us and there is a high
level of interest in the policy areas that they address - particularly,
the backlog of disability benefits claims. Therefore, in the interest
of time, I am going to forgo a lengthy opening statement and just
briefly touch upon one bill on today's agenda which I am proud to have
introduced.
H.R. 2423, the Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical Examinations
Improvement Act, has three main objectives.
First, the bill would extend the authority of the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs to enter into contracts with private physicians to
conduct medical disability evaluations.
With the passage of this bill, this successful program allowing
physicians outside of VA to conduct contract examinations would
continue for an additional three years, through 2016. This would allow
VA to more quickly evaluate veterans' disabilities and facilitate
access to the care they need.
Second, this bill would also extend license portability to contract
examination providers, meaning that physicians with an active state
license may provide C&P examinations in another state because they are
working on behalf of the Federal government.
Although VA and DoD already provide license portability for
physicians working directly for them, this authority is not extended to
contract examination providers. This provision is designed to
facilitate the C&P examination process by allowing contract physicians
the flexibility to travel and assist in areas that are experiencing
lengthy delays in scheduling examinations.
Finally, this piece of legislation would also expand the number of
regional offices (ROs) allowed to utilize contract examinations from 10
to 15. In addition, it would require the Secretary to determine which
ROs would benefit most from the use of contract examinations by
performing data analysis of the backlog and disability examination wait
times.
C&P examinations are a key component of the disability claims
process; therefore, by expanding the authority and scope of the
contract examination process, it is my hope that veterans can more
quickly receive the necessary medical evidence for their claim. This
will cut down on overall development and processing time, resulting in
the faster issuance of a final decision.
Again, in the interest of time, I would like to reiterate my
request that today's witnesses abide by the decorum and rules of this
hearing and to summarize your statement to five minutes or less during
oral testimony. We have a large number of bills on the agenda today,
and I want to make sure everyone is heard in a timely manner. I would
also remind all present that, without any objection, your written
testimony will be made part of the hearing record.
I appreciate everyone's attendance at this hearing and now call on
the Ranking Member for her opening statement.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Dina Titus
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for your continued leadership
and efforts to address the issues facing our Nation's veterans.
Today, we are examining 10 bills. I support several of these
provisions brought forth by my colleagues, and am also proud to have
introduced H.R. 2086, the Pay As You Rate Act, which is supported by a
number of major VSO's. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for including it on
today's agenda. I hope we can work together to quickly move this
legislation to the House floor.
Our first bill, H.R. 1288, World War II Merchant Mariner Service
Act, sponsored by Mr. Butterfield, pertains to World War II Merchant
Mariners, a group who served a critical role keeping the war effort
moving forward as an auxiliary to the Navy. This legislation would
expand the acceptable forms of documentation used to determine
eligibility for benefits as a Merchant Marine, and would greatly assist
in allowing these men and women to prove their service.
I also wanted to mention some of the of our bills before us today
that are part of a slate of 10 pieces of legislation introduced by
Members of the Democratic Caucus to assist VA in tackling the claims
backlog.
On today's agenda is H.R. 1623, the VA Claims Efficiency through
Information Act of 2013, brought forward by Ms. Negrete McLeod
(McCloud) of the DAMA Subcommittee. H.R. 1623 requires VA to track the
time spent evaluating each type of medical condition in a veteran's
disability claim and the performance of each regional office in
handling disability claims. Understanding which medical conditions
consume the most time to process will help Congress understand the
agency's backlog and to shape policies that can expedite the
progression of the claim. H.R. 1623 would ensure that VBA builds in
detailed measures which will ultimately lead to gains in efficiency by
better understanding the backlog and ways to address it.
Next, H.R. 1809, the Faster Filing Act, was proposed by Rep.
O'Rourke also of the DAMA Subcommittee. This bill would help encourage
and educate veterans about the various methods that may increase the
timeliness of their claims, such as utilizing the Fully Developed
Claims program. The Fully Developed Claims program will not only help
to lower the backlog significantly, but Veterans will receive their
claims in the appropriate time period with an extra year of benefits as
an incentive. This legislation will encourage veterans to utilize the
faster approach.
And finally, my bill, H.R. 2086, the Pay As You Rate Act, would
require VA to pay for medical conditions as they are adjudicated in an
electronic system. Currently, veterans typically receive payment when
all medical conditions within a claim are fully adjudicated. This
legislation will require VA to pay veterans as individual medical
conditions are adjudicated, which will pay veterans at a faster rate.
Veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan average 8.5 contentions in
their claims. While some parts of these claims are complex and time
consuming, some components are simpler. The VA should compensate
veterans for the simpler components as early as possible while
continuing to work on the more complex aspects of a claim.
I believe this is a common sense approach, and I hope we can move
this bill to the Floor as quickly as possible.
Collectively, the legislation before us today should assist VA in
their continued effort to transform their process from mountains of
paper one to an efficient, and effective electronic system. In just the
past few months, the VA has made great strides in serving our Nations
heroes. They have rolled out a transformation plan to all 56 RO's and
nearly eliminated all claims over two years old. More needs to be done,
and it needs to be done quickly to ensure that veterans receive the
benefits they have earned in a timely fashion.
I thank all of the Members for their thoughtful legislation. And, I
thank all of our esteemed witnesses for joining us today and look
forward to hearing their testimony.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Prepared Statement of Chairman Jeff Miller
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
With your permission, I would like to make a few remarks on H.R.
2189, a bill I introduced that would establish a commiscion or task
force to evaluate the disability claims' backlog.
VA has recently brainstormed a number of initiatives, in an effort
to get the backlog of disability benefit claims under control. We all
hope that these initiatives were well meant, well planned and well
executed. And, time will tell.
However, starting new initiative after new initiative after new
initiative is just no way to do business.
And this is why H.R. 2189 is vital.
An outside, independent analysis is necessary to clearly identify,
first, why the backlog exists, and second, how to prevent this
situation from ever recurring. Make no mistake, this commission or task
force is an opportunity.
The team assembled would work towards VA's goals and would give
fresh perspective on the best path forward --- towards an intelligent,
efficient claims process. Specifically, H.R. 2189 would require an
examination of backlog factors, and an analysis of laws and regulations
applicable to claims and appeals. Recommendations would be made.
In performing this review, the veteran-friendly, non-adversarial,
nature of the claims process would be underscored. Team members would
be appointed by Congress, the President, and would include VA
representation. This commission or task force would pull perspectives
from the veterans service organization community as well as private-
sector leaders in fields such as claims processing, logistics, and
product tracking. Finally, the bill would require interim reporting on
the group's progress, as well as a final report within 180 days.
I am aware that some of the stakeholders here today express
skepticism, and suggest this bill is unnecessary. I would respond to
this skepticism by reminding all involved that the status quo is
unacceptable. Many of those who have shouted the loudest that ``change
is necessary'' are the very first to back down when an idea for real
change to the system is proposed.
Yes, VA has made some progress with the backlog numbers. But
overall processing times still remain well over VA's 2015 goal. Even
with the improvement VA has shown, 65% of claims are still backlogged.
Congress, VA, and veterans can all agree that now is not the time
to take the foot off the gas.
I have heard concerns that VA needs additional time to allow its
transformation plan to work, and that a commission would slow this
already glacial process down. I would like to clarify for all that are
here today that this is simply not the case.
Rather, what we are asking this team to do is work with VA to
objectively evaluate the situation surrounding the backlog --- and
arrive at solutions that VA and others, who are so engulfed in the
current day to day system themselves, may not be able to see. This is
not very different from VA's recent decision to work claims that were
pending in excess of two years. That initiative was not part of VA's
transformation plan. Yet, it was proposed and advanced on short order
because VA decided a course-correction was needed.
Couldn't similar corrections be proposed on short order by a
knowledgeable group of independent thinkers? I believe we all know that
the answer to that is ``yes.''
In addition, many academics and well-respected individuals in the
veterans' benefits realm have called for an independent commission to
evaluate this process. I absolutely agree with them. A ``fail first''
approach is not acceptable, when there is a chance to do more
immediately.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you and the Members of the Subcommittee for
your time. I would like to encourage all of you to support H.R. 2189, a
bill to establish a commission or task force to evaluate the backlog of
disability claims at VA, and I yield back.
Prepared Statement of Hon. G. K. Butterfield
Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you very much for allowing me the opportunity to
testify in support of my bill H. R. 1288, the World War II Merchant
Mariner Service Act. Seeing this bill signed into law is a personal
priority and I am hopeful that this hearing signals that I am one step
closer to achieving that goal on behalf of coastwise World War II
Merchant Mariners.
As this Subcommittee knows all too well, ensuring that individuals
who sacrificed so much in service to our country receive the
recognition they deserve is one of the most important jobs we have as
Members of Congress. For the past three Congresses, I have led a strong
bipartisan effort to recognize individuals that served our country
during World War II in the Merchant Marine. In this Congress, I am
again joined by a strong bipartisan coalition of, at present, 84
cosponsors, in support of H. R. 1288. Five of the bill's cosponsors are
members of this Committee including full committee Ranking Member
Michaud, and I thank each of them for their support. Passing this bill
is the right thing to do and now is the right time to do it.
My bill is very simple. It would expand the types of documentation
accepted by the federal government when a very small group of mariners
that operated tugboats and barges domestically during World War II
apply for veterans' status. Once recognized as a veteran, they would be
provided benefits limited only to burial and a U.S. flag. Let me repeat
that - qualifying Merchant Mariners, who can prove service through
expanded acceptable documentation, would receive only burial benefits
and the honor of being recognized by their country for their sacrifice
and service. My bill does not provide for health coverage, disability
payments, or payouts of any kind to Merchant Mariners who served during
World War II and does not impact direct spending.
Currently, the required documents to satisfactorily prove service
no longer exist or can be extremely hard to find. I have included
documents in my submitted testimony that demonstrate that many of these
necessary documents no longer exist or never existed, largely because
of decisions by the government over several decades, and I ask they be
included in the record.
As a veteran of the United States Army, it is important to note
that this bill takes nothing away from the brave men and women who have
served and continue to serve our country in our traditional armed
forces. It does not diminish the importance of their sacrifices and
does not reduce the esteem in which we all hold veterans of our
traditional armed forces. These mariners have gone unrecognized for
more than 70 years, and they deserve to be recognized for their service
because they too helped to protect the freedoms we all cherish as
Americans.
My bipartisan bill has been scored by the Congressional Budget
Office to have an ``insignificant and de minimis'' effect on direct
spending over a 10 year period. Let me repeat that - the non-partisan
CBO has scored this bill as not impacting direct spending.
Estimates show that fewer than 2,000 of these mariners who served
the United States during World War II are still living. In fact, it's
very possible that there are only hundreds of left today. Colleagues,
we are quickly running out of time to recognize these few remaining
Americans that stood up for freedom and democracy when their country
needed their help. Without weapons or formal training, these brave
folks risked their lives, and tragically too many gave their lives in
defense of our great nation. For those that are still living, we must
not let their efforts and contributions go unrecognized while we still
have a chance. The passing of Senator Lautenberg, the last remaining
World War II veteran in the Senate, is a strong reminder to all of us
in Congress that if we are to honor and recognize these Merchant
Mariners, the time to do so is now.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Titus, colleagues, I thank you for
allowing me the time to speak on this important issue today. I strongly
encourage you to support H. R. 1288 and urge you to schedule a markup
soon so that these few remaining unsung American heroes have a chance
to gain the recognition they rightly deserve.
I am happy to answer any questions that members of the subcommittee
may have.
Thank you.
Executive Summary
The World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act would accomplish the
following:
Expand the official documentation accepted by the
Secretary of Homeland Security to grant veterans status with limited
benefits to men and women who solely operated tug boats and barges in
the U.S. Merchant Marine along the U. S. Coast during WWII (December 7,
1941-December 31, 1946).
Provide veterans burial benefits (headstone, flag,
plaque, etc)
Award any commendations, ribbons, or awards earned
through service
Exclusive Benefits:
Burial benefits afforded under chapters 23 and 24 of
title 38, United States Code
Awarding of any medals, ribbons, or commendations through
service
Additional Documentation Accepted:
Social Security Administration records
Validated testimony by the applicant or closest living
relative
Other official records that provide sufficient proof of
service
Status update on HR 1288:
84 bipartisan cosponsors, including Ranking Member
Michaud
It is believed that, at most, there are 2350 of these World War II
Coastwise Merchant Seamen alive today. It is also believed that only
170 of these Seamen would access the benefits provided by HR 1288. Due
to the small population of surviving Seamen and limited benefits
afforded in this legislation, CBO has determined the bill would have
``An insignificant effect on direct spending over the 2014 to 2023
period.''
Congressman Butterfield has introduced this legislation for the
past three Congresses, and passing this legislation is a personal
priority for him.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Chris Gibson
I would like to begin by thanking the Chairman, the Ranking member,
and members of the Committee for holding this hearing. I sincerely
appreciate the opportunity to come before the Committee to discuss H.R.
1494, the Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act, an important bill
designed to help our Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans.
During the Vietnam War, the U.S. Army sprayed 20 million gallons of
the herbicide ``Agent Orange'' to remove jungle foliage from the
Vietnam terrain. Agent Orange contains dioxin, a toxic chemical residue
found in locations where Agent Orange was used or stored. The U.S.
Government has since linked dioxin to harmful or serious medical
conditions affecting those who served in or around Vietnam, including
non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, prostate and other cancers, Type II Diabetes,
and Parkinson's disease.
Recognizing the debt owed to veterans who were exposed to Agent
Orange, Congress passed, and President George H.W. Bush signed into
law, the Agent Orange Act of 1991. The 1991 law empowered the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs to declare certain illnesses to be presumed to have
been caused by exposure to Agent Orange and enabled Vietnam veterans to
receive disability compensation for related conditions. However, in
2002, the VA limited the scope of these ``presumptive'' illnesses
covered within the Act to only those veterans who could provide proof
that they had ``boots on ground'' in Vietnam. Boots on the ground
encompassed land forces and the riverine, or Brown Water Navy. As a
result, veterans who served in the waters off the coast of Vietnam,
commonly called ``blue water veterans,'' were forced to file individual
claims with the VA to restore their benefits. The VA has denied 32,880
such claims through 2009.
Under current law, Blue Water Navy Veterans who did not set foot in
Vietnam or serve aboard ships that operated on the inland waterways of
Vietnam between January 9, 1962 and May 7, 1975 have the burden of
proof to demonstrate exposure to Agent Orange and the connection to
their illnesses. These claims are decided on a case-by-case basis.
The Bureau of Veterans Affairs maintains a list of U.S. Navy and
Coast Guard ships that operated within the vicinity of Vietnam. Some
offshore vessels docked to the shore of Vietnam, operated in Vietnam's
close coastal waters and sent smaller vessels ashore, or conducted
operations on the inland waterways of Vietnam. Current VA policy for
when a Veteran files an Agent Orange exposure-related claim requires
the VA Regional Office to forward a request for research to the
Department of Defense's Army and Joint Services Records Research Center
(JSRRC). Evidence confirmed through military records must show that the
Veteran was aboard one of these ships that operated close to shore in
order to receive benefits. However, the list is imperfect and not
comprehensive.
Our Vietnam Veterans should not be made to wait any longer than
necessary to receive their benefits. My bill would direct the JSRRC to
do a comprehensive search to determine which ships are eligible for
coverage under current law, reducing the wait time when new claims are
filed. This would help Veterans who are currently sick or, in some
cases, have died and claims are being made by their surviving families.
Passage of this bill will alleviate some of the current VA Claims
backlog our veterans are facing by proactively determining what we know
today, rather than waiting until tomorrow when claims are made.
In closing, I would also like to point out that the Congressional
Budget Office has indicated H.R. 1494 will have no significant cost and
the bill enjoys the support of major veterans organizations such as the
American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Military Officers
Association of America, the Military Coalition, the Vietnam Veterans
Association, the Association of the U.S. Navy, and the Blue Water Navy
Vietnam Veterans Association. It researches available documents to
determine who is eligible under current law to receive presumptive
coverage for exposure to Agent Orange. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I look
forward to any questions your subcommittee may have.
Executive Summary
Under current law, Blue Water Navy Veterans who did not set foot in
Vietnam or serve aboard ships that operated on the inland waterways of
Vietnam between January 9, 1962 and May 7, 1975 have the burden of
proof to demonstrate exposure to Agent Orange and the connection to
their illnesses. These claims are decided on a case-by-case basis.
The Bureau of Veterans Affairs maintains a list of U.S. Navy and
Coast Guard ships that operated within the vicinity of Vietnam. Some
offshore vessels docked to the shore of Vietnam, operated in Vietnam's
close coastal waters and sent smaller vessels ashore.
My bill would direct the Joint Services Records Research Center to
do a comprehensive search to determine which ships are eligible for
coverage under current law, reducing the wait time when new claims are
filed. This would help Veterans who are currently sick or, in some
cases, have died and claims are being made by their surviving families.
The bill enjoys the support of major veterans organizations such as
the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Military
Officers Association of America, the Military Coalition, the Vietnam
Veterans Association, the Association of the U.S. Navy, and the Blue
Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Association.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Kevin McCarthy
Thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing today and providing
me the opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 2138, the Ending VA
Claims Disability Backlog and Accountability Act.
Every day, our brave men and women in our Armed Forces risk their
lives to preserve our freedom and the American way of life. When our
service members return home, they often seek out the care and benefits
the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) is mandated to provide, only
to be met by bureaucratic roadblocks. The Department of Veterans
Affairs has continually stumbled in its efforts to serve our veterans,
largely due to the increasing number of backlogged claims. We must
honor those who have served, and that is why Congress has continued to
increase the VA - an uncommon occurrence in today's fiscal climate.
Yet, despite this increased funding, the VA has and is failing to meet
the needs of our veterans, and is, in it of itself, a major obstacle to
ensuring our veterans have their disability claims resolved in a timely
manner.
I continue to hear from frustrated veterans in my community about
how they must wait for long periods of time, even years, for a decision
on a claim. Recently, these complaints have continued to get worse,
occurring more frequently. Even more frustrating, my own inquiries -
Congressional inquiries - to the VA on behalf of our veterans were
mostly ignored. So I appreciate the help of this committee for working
with me to request an audit from the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) to seek answers.
The GAO audit confirmed our veterans' worst complaints, and what
disturbed me in particular was the number of backlogged claims at the
Los Angeles Regional Office (LA RO) - which serves many of the veterans
in my district. At the time of the audit, GAO found that 80% of over
25,000 claims at the LA RO were older than 125 days, one of the worst
performing regional offices in the country. GAO also determined the
average wait time for claims is 318 days from start to finish- nearly
three times longer than the VA's targeted completion time of 125 days.
After reviewing the audit, House Veterans Affairs Committee
Chairman Jeff Miller and I immediately called upon Veterans Affairs
Secretary Eric Shinseki to take swift action to implement the GAO's
recommendations to fix the delays in VA services and held a hearing
where I questioned VA Undersecretary Allison Hickey on the damaging
statistics in the GAO audits and blatant leadership problems within the
VA. But instead of acknowledging many of problems identified by GAO -
Undersecretary Hickey denied many of the audits' findings.
I have repeatedly said that the House will keep the VA accountable
to its goal of eliminating the backlog, by processing claims within 125
days with a 98% accuracy rating by 2015. So in addition to the
Chairman's bill, H.R. 2189 which I cosponsored, I introduced H.R. 2138
with the Chairman's support to end the backlog. H.R. 2138 addresses the
GAO-identified factors that contribute to the lengthy processing times
of disability claims, improves congressional oversight of the VA's
efforts to reduce the backlog, and increases accountability by
requiring the VA to end the backlog by Memorial Day 2015.
The bottom line is many veterans literally wait years before they
receive needed benefits and sometimes it can be too late. The current
system is failing our veterans, the very men and women who have served
our country. They deserve better than this and we want to help the VA
to better serve our veterans and end the backlog. I am confident both
H.R. 2138 and H.R. 2189 will help in this effort.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to testify today. I yield
back my time.
Prepared Statement of Verna Jones
Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus and distinguished Members of
the Subcommittee, on behalf of Commander Koutz and the 2.4 million
members of The American Legion, I thank you and your colleagues for the
work you do in support of our service members and veterans as well as
their families. The hard work of this Subcommittee in creating
significant legislation has left a positive impact on our military and
veterans' community.
H.R. 1288: World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to accept additional
documentation when considering the application for veterans status of
an individual who performed service as a coastwise merchant seaman
during World War II, and for other purposes.
``[Mariners] have written one of its most brilliant chapters. They
have delivered the goods when and where needed in every theater of
operations and across every ocean in the biggest, the most difficult
and dangerous job ever undertaken. As time goes on, there will be
greater public understanding of our merchant's fleet record during
[World War II].''--President Franklin D. Roosevelt
The question of veteran standing for those that served in the
Merchant Marines during World War II has routinely been debated. Is the
merchant mariner a veteran? According to a January 9, 1988 decision of
the Secretary of the Air Force veteran status is warranted for a
merchant mariner that served between December 7, 1941 and December 31,
1946. The American Legion similarly recognizes these standards. We
encourage these men to join their brothers and sisters that have served
their nation honorably during periods of conflict in The American
Legion. Additionally, we support including the Merchant Marine flag
``in all National Displays as an official United States Auxiliary
Service Flag and to fly beside other Service flags of the Armed Forces
as appropriate and in accordance with accepted protocol.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Resolution No. 3, October 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1288 directly addresses correcting the record for any members
who may have served in the Merchant Marines and have lacked the proper
documentation to prove service. World War II Merchant Marine and
maritime historian Charles Dana Gibson provided testimony to the United
States Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs on May 7, 2008, regarding
how some individuals entered the Merchant Marines; the manner that men
entered the Merchant Marines has resulted in difficulties for World War
II merchant mariners achieving veteran status.
Unlike the Departments of Army and Navy, where enlistment
documentation was housed within the War Department, many men in the
Merchant Marines were contracted by a private sector employer ``through
means of `letters of intent to employ' written by shipping companies
and/or unions and addressed to the United States Coast Guard which then
issued the seaman's certification for one of three entry rating . . .
.Such men did not go through the apprentice training programs that were
operated by the U.S. Maritime Service and for which we do not have the
approximate numbers'', according to Mr. Gibson \2\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Chales Dana Gibson, Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, May
2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The nature that many of these men entered Merchant Marine service
suggests that records of service may not have been maintained in a
similar manner as veterans who served in other branches of the armed
forces. As a result, some of these veterans charged with the protection
of cargo on vessels, to include soldiers and sailors, may have long
been denied benefits entitled to veterans. Through the passage of H.R.
1288, veterans of the Merchant Marines may be able to finally receive
benefits earned through their sacrifice to this nation's war efforts
during World War II.
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 1288.
H.R. 1494: Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act
To direct the Secretary of Defense to review the operation of
certain ships during the Vietnam Era, and for other purposes.
The exemption of Blue Water Navy Vietnam veterans from presumptive
Agent Orange exposure has caused heartache and frustration for many
veterans. Current regulations require Blue Water Navy veterans to prove
going ashore in Vietnam; their ship is one of 244 ships currently
registered on Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) public health
website \3\, or they have to file a claim, ask VA to research to
determine if a ship qualifies for presumptive exposure in their quest
for VA disability benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/shiplist/
list.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to H.R. 1494, Congress calls upon the Department of
Defense (DOD) to ``review the logs of each ship under the authority of
the Secretary of the Navy that is known to have operated in the waters
near Vietnam during the Vietnam Era'' to determine whether each ship
operated in the territorial waters of Vietnam, the dates of the ship's
service in Vietnam, and the proximity of the ship to the shore at its
closest point.
Through the passage of this bill, ownership of the whereabouts of
naval vessels during the conflict is rightfully placed upon DOD as they
were the department ordering the deployment of ships. In August 2012,
The American Legion directly addressed this issue, calling upon ``DOD
to provide a full disclosure of all wartime and non-wartime locations
to (VA) where hazardous environmental exposures exist and that armed
forces members were exposed through testing, transportation, storage,
disposal and environmental contamination. \4\'' Additionally, we stated
that ``(DOD) prepare and provide an updated list of all areas outside
of the United States, including but not limited to Panama and Okinawa,
where it is known that herbicides, specifically Agent Orange, were used
in connection with the location and deployment of troops, to include
but not limited to the herbicide or herbicides used; the date of each
use of each herbicide; and the units located in each area/place that
may have been exposed.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Resolution No. 95, August 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ownership of location of naval vessels during Vietnam should
not completely fall upon VA's shoulders. The ships were deployed by the
direction of DOD, as were the sailors. DOD would be the department
responsible for the maintenance of these records and should be directed
to supply the location of all naval vessels during the conflict.
It is long past time that a comprehensive accounting of these
vessels be completed, to save veterans and VA many needless hours of
time addressing claims for benefits.
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 1494.
H.R. 1623: VA Claims Efficiency Through Information Act of 2013
H.R. 1809
H.R. 1623: To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make publicly available certain
information about pending and completed claims for compensation under
the laws administered by the Secretary, and for other purposes.
H.R. 1809: To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide notice of average times for
processing claims and percentage of claims approved, and for other
purposes.
With over 2,600 accredited representatives dedicated in assisting
veterans and their dependents with claims for VA benefits, The American
Legion is keenly aware of the necessity for transparency within the
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and to resolve the backlog of VA
claims. Due to this vast network of representatives, we are able to
monitor areas of concerns held by the accredited representatives that
may negatively affect veterans' claims.
Currently, VBA releases a weekly Monday Morning Workload Report
(MMWR). The MMWR contains numerous statistics to include but not
limited to, average days pending for a claim and adjudication accuracy.
These statistics reflect production and accuracy for each VA Regional
Office (VARO) and national averages. Additionally, it provides an
accuracy average for the previous three months. \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ www.vba.va.gov/REPORTS/mmwr/MMWL--Summary.doc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1623 and H.R. 1809 direct the VBA to provide statistics
indicating the number of claims granted and denied by each VARO.
Additionally, H.R. 1623 directs VBA to provide statistics regarding the
grant or denial of benefits by medical condition. The American Legion
supports full transparency of VBA. As an organization dedicated to
support the needs of the veteran community, to include veterans'
disability benefits, we assert a full understanding of VBA's policies
and the implementation of policies is required. In August 2012, we
called upon Congress to require VA to provide in a readily available
venue a report of ``the number of claims for compensation and
disability that were submitted, that were granted/awarded, that were
denied and that remain in a pending status \6\''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Resolution No. 99, August 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1809 discusses veterans pursuing VA benefits through filing a
fully developed claim (FDC). As members of the Committee may know, The
American Legion has worked closely with White House and VA staff as the
FDC process was implemented nationwide. Our involvement with the
implementation of the FDC process has resulted in the visiting of
numerous VAROs with VA and this Committee's staff. A report of our
findings will be released later this year.
What The American Legion has seen is that in many cases, the
improvement in processing time by pursing a claim that qualifies under
the FDC process is striking. Helping veterans to better understand what
the best option available to them to pursue their claim will help not
only countless veterans applying for disability benefits, but also VA
as claims are more efficiently routed to the process stream best suited
for a veteran's claim. Increasing transparency and access to the data
necessary to make informed decisions about their claims is vital to
continuing the improvement process in the overall claims system.
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 1623.
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 1809.
H.R. 2086: The Pay As You Rate Act
To direct the Secretary to make interim payments of disability
compensation benefits for certain claims for such compensation prior to
the adjudication of such claims, and for other purposes.
This legislation would provide a much needed way to start access to
health care and benefits for veterans in the disability process. Often,
for veterans with complex medical conditions, or multiple medical
conditions, the process is lengthy because VA will typically wait until
all issues have been fully researched and resolved before issuing a
decision that covers all conditions for which benefits are sought.
While VA has the authority to grant individual issues and defer
decisions on other issues currently pending, this is seldom done.
According to findings at American Legion Regional Office Action Review
(ROAR) visits to VA Regional Offices (VAROs) this is often because
employees do not get credit for such split and deferred decisions, so
it goes against their incentive to devote the time to writing a
decision they will not receive work credit for.
Starting the flow of benefits to a disabled veteran is important
for many reasons. The start of disability payments, even if they are
only a small amount of money for a simple condition rated at a low
percentage, can often make the difference between making ends meet and
falling into dire financial straits. Veterans are compensated for their
disabilities in some part because these disorders negatively affect
their ability to work and earn a living. Furthermore, receiving a
service-connected disability rating gives the veteran access to health
care for that disability. The sooner they can receive treatment, the
better they can mitigate the negative effects of the disability.
This bill would help direct such decisions, rating the issues that
can be rated and starting at least a trickle flow of benefits to the
veteran, and that is vitally important to many disabled veterans as
they wait through the many months it takes VA to render complete
decisions on every issue.
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 2086.
H.R. 2138: Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and Accountability Act
H.R. 2138: To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to resolve
the backlog of disability claims of the Department of Veterans Affairs,
and for other purposes.
Repeatedly, VA Secretary Eric Shinseki has touted VA's bold
initiative to eliminate the backlog with 98 percent accuracy by 2015.
While we certainly applaud the Secretary's vision, we remain concerned
that this initiative will not become a reality. Officials within VBA
suggest that a ``tipping point'' has been reached regarding the backlog
of VA claims, as they reported that claims awaiting decisions for at
least two years have finally been adjudicated; however, this success
raises at least two questions:
u VBA was able to adjudicate claims in 60 days that they could not
adjudicate in at least two years. Why were these practices not employed
earlier?
u As these claims were rapidly adjudicated, does VBA feel
confident in the accuracy?
The latter question unfortunately will likely not be answered for
years as these decisions may be appealed to a VA Decision Review
Officer, Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA), and Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims. Historically, statistics generated through BVA
decisions suggest that the quality of adjudication at VAROs is not as
accurate as the MMWR would indicate.
H.R. 2138 directs the Secretary to provide tangible metrics to
ensure that VBA meets the goal of eliminating the backlog with 98
percent accuracy by Memorial Day, 2015. Additionally, it calls for
necessary records from federal agencies to be expeditiously transferred
to VA for the purpose of VA claims' adjudication. The enactment of this
provision should reduce the timeline that VA experiences when waiting
for records from agencies such as the Social Security Administration as
suggested by Under Secretary for Benefits Allison Hickey during her
March 2013 testimony before the United States Senate Committee on
Veterans' Affairs \7\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ http://www.heller.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2013/3/heller-
questions-veterans-benefits-administration-about-va-claim-backlog.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is also noted that this bill calls for a comprehensive training
program for claims' adjudicators. Recognizing that VA claims can be
significantly complicated due to the nature of the condition(s), the
responsible act would include an exhaustive training to help ensure
that VBA can achieve Secretary Shinseki's objective.
The American Legion has long conducted VARO visitations to review
claims' adjudication quality. We have long held that their training, in
its current format, is not sufficient. We applaud the bill's attempt to
improve training within VBA. In August 2012, The American Legion
petitioned ``Congress to pass legislation that requires VA be held
accountable for achieving the VA Secretary's stated goal to achieve an
operational state for VA in which no claim is pending over 125 days and
all claims have an accuracy rate of 98 percent or higher. \8\'' We
believe the enactment of this bill will aid in the Secretary achieving
his objective; more importantly, it will assist in reducing the backlog
of claims and allow veterans and their dependents to receive the
benefits they deserve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Resolution No. 99, August 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 2138.
H.R. 2189:
To establish a commission or task force to evaluate the backlog of
disability claims of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The commission or task force established by this legislation would
address the backlog of disability claims by considering a broad gamut
of considerations, regarding the interests of veterans, the public, the
Constitution, and other interested parties. The commission will issue
regular reports over the course of half a year addressing their
findings on the issue.
The American Legion has no position on this legislation.
H.R. 2341: The Veterans Pension Protection Act
To amend title 38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs to consider the resources of individuals applying for
pension that were recently disposed of by the individuals for less than
fair market value when determining the eligibility of such individuals
for such pension, and for other purposes.
The American Legion and our network of over 2,600 service officers
regularly work with veterans and their families to ensure they receive
the benefits they deserve. Over the last several years, it has become
more apparent that predatory actors are moving in and taking advantage
of elderly veterans in a vulnerable position, by engaging in
questionable business practices which can fleece a veteran of their
money while offering false promises of pension programs to pay for
elder care facilities.
While The American Legion is tremendously appreciative of critical
attention to this issue, and this legislation's aim is admirable -
seeking to protect veterans from these predatory practices by
increasing the look back period when examining veterans' assets--The
American Legion has reservations as to whether or not this is the most
appropriate measure to provide relief to veterans and their families.
Research conducted through The American Legion's network of service
providers shows, that this new look back period would affect surviving
spouses of veterans who need benefits, as well as questions how VA
would be able to address the increased workload of the look back period
when pension centers struggle to address their existing workload.
However, as this is a matter of concern, The American Legion
continues to work with the expertise of our service officers,
membership and staff to determine a course of action which would
provide remedy in this situation. When such a remedy is determined,
then by our own resolution process our membership, will The American
Legion be able to ratify a plan for taking action. Due to the
complexity of the situation, there is no consensus and therefore we can
neither support nor oppose this course of action.
The American Legion has no position on this legislation.
H.R. 2423: Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical Exams Improvement Act
To improve the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
enter into contracts with private physicians to conduct medical
disability examinations.
In the traditional claims process two of the three critical
components needed for a veteran to be granted service connection for a
disability require an examining physician. A veteran must have a
current diagnosis with information about the extent and severity of the
disorder provided by a physician. A veteran also must have a ``nexus
opinion'' or a written analysis by a doctor stating that it is ``as
likely as not'' that the veteran's current disability is a result of an
event, injury or disorder sustained in service. There are other methods
involving aggravation of a condition, development of a condition
secondary to an already service-connected condition, malpractice and
other concerns; but physician's opinions are vital to proper decision
making in the claims process.
In many regions, contract examinations through outside parties to
perform these Compensation and Pension (C&P) examinations are a vital
component in ensuring VA has the resources to meet demands in the local
area. Not every area has appropriate VHA facilities or resources to
provide these exams. In practice, the outside contractors have
performed perfectly well, and currently the system relies on these
important contract exams to operate smoothly. If the contracting
authority were to expire, an already overstressed system would be
further taxed, potentially to the breaking point. With wait times for
exams a potential delaying factor in an already overlong disability
claims process, losing this important piece could be disastrous to
attempts to get the claims process back on track in a timely fashion.
The American Legion supports the extension of the contracting
authority for these C&P exams. There are other means that will help
carry the load on the stressed system such as better use of Disability
Benefits Questionnaires (DBQs) by private physicians to alleviate the
need for additional exams, and better training of VA employees to
recognize and accept private medical opinions that provide valid and
complete information sufficient to allow rating of a claim, but losing
the contracting authority would set the whole process back.
The American Legion supports the passage of H.R. 2423.
Prepared Statement of Alexander Nicholson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill # Bill Name Sponsor Position
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1288 WWII Merchant Mariner Service Act Butterfield No Position
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1494 Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act Gibson Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1623 VA Claims Efficiency Through Information Act Negrete McLeod Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1809 A bill to direct the VA to provide notice of O'Rourke Support
average times for processing claims and
percentage of claims approved, etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2086 Pay as You Rate Act Titus Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2138 Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and McCarthy Support
Accountability Act
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2189 A bill to establish a commission or task force Miller Support
to evaluate the backlog of disability claims
of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2341 Veterans Pension Protection Act Rooney No Position
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2382 Prioritizing Urgent Claims for Veterans Act Cook Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2423 Disabled Veterans Access' to Medical Exams Runyan Support
Improvement Act
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, and Distinguished Members of
the Subcommittee:
On behalf of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), I
would like to extend our gratitude for being given the opportunity to
share with you our views and recommendations regarding these important
pieces of legislation.
IAVA is the nation's first and largest nonprofit, nonpartisan
organization for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and their
supporters. Founded in 2004, our mission is important but simple - to
improve the lives of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans and their families.
With a steadily growing base of almost 270,000 members and supporters,
we strive to help create a society that honors and supports veterans of
all generations.
As of this week, there are over 833,000 VA claims pending and over
547,000 of those are backlogged. But those who find themselves in need
of benefits and care from the VA are more than just numbers and
aggregate data to be reported on and tracked each week. Each number
represents a face, a person, a family, and a story. To help bring these
stories to life for Congress, the media, and the American public, IAVA
launched a new digital tool this week called The Wait We Carry, which
can be accessed and explored online at www.TheWaitWeCarry.org. We
encourage each of you and your staff to take a moment to look at this
enlightening data visualization, and use it to find real stories of
real constituents in your own home states and communities who are or
were stuck in the backlog.
IAVA believes that all veterans must have access to quality health
care, benefits, and related care and services. The men and women who
volunteer to serve in our nation's military do so with the explicit
understanding that they and their families will be cared for during
their period of service, and also after their period of service should
they sustain injuries or disabilities while serving. IAVA is therefore
able to offer its support for many of the bills that are the subject of
this hearing today because we believe they would better enable the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to live up to this commitment on
behalf of the American people.
H.R. 1288
IAVA currently takes no position on H.R. 1288, the WWII Merchant
Mariner Service Act, which would designate those who served as Merchant
Mariners during WWII as veterans for the purpose of providing these
individuals and their family members with access to certain benefits
afforded to veterans. While we understand and acknowledge that there is
an ongoing debate within the veteran community about whether to bestow
veteran status and benefits on other categories of individuals who
served our nation during previous periods of conflict, we defer to that
debate and to our colleague veteran and military service organizations,
whose memberships and constituencies this would impact more, on this
recommendation.
H.R. 1494
IAVA supports H.R. 1494, the Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability
Act, which would require the Secretary of Defense to determine the
proximity to the Vietnamese mainland of Naval vessels deployed to the
Vietnamese area of operations during the war in Vietnam, and to provide
that information to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for the purpose
of making it available to the public. Many veterans of the war in
Vietnam were exposed to harsh chemicals like Agent Orange through
direct contact. However, many others were exposed in indirect ways
while serving on ships stationed off the Vietnamese coast.
Keeping our promise to care for our veterans when they return home
means constantly evaluating and analyzing not only the delivery of
their benefits, but also the circumstances that qualify veterans for
receipt of those benefits. IAVA supports this bill because it will
expand the umbrella of access to resources for veterans afflicted with
symptoms related to exposure to Agent Orange to those veterans who also
came into indirect contact with the chemical.
H.R.1623
IAVA supports H.R. 1623, the VA Claims Efficiency Through
Information Act, which would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
to provide and post statistical information on disability claims on the
VA website. This information would include key data points, such as the
number of claims pending and the number of claims in backlog status,
and these data would be further stratified by VA regional office and
the type of medical condition for which a claim has been filed.
The VA already posts this type of information in raw form on its
website on a weekly basis, and it has been making important strides
toward ending the claims backlog, but the work is far from complete. As
of this week, the VA has 833,000 disability claims pending, over
547,000 of which are in backlog status. IAVA supports this bill because
it aims to provide America's veterans with clearer information and a
more complete picture regarding the disability claims filing processes.
At the same time, it will provide Congress with more detailed
information on the areas of the claims filing process that are
inefficient, enabling legislators to better formulate thoughtful
policies.
H.R.1809
IAVA supports H.R. 1809, which requires that the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs post information on the average time for processing
claims and the percentage of claims that have been approved on the VA
website and in certain VA offices and facilities.
The VA is currently in the process of attempting to simplify and
streamline the process for filing and tracking a disability claim.
However, at present a vast majority of claims are still stuck on paper
rather than in the VA's electronic systems, leaving open the
possibility of lost or misfiled claims for a large number of America's
veterans. IAVA supports this bill because it aims to provide veterans
with more information on the claims process which will assist them in
making informed decisions about the best way to file their claim and
the expectations they can have on the time it will take to complete the
claims process.
H.R. 2086
IAVA supports H.R. 2086, the Pay As You Rate Act, which would allow
certain veterans filing disability claims to receive interim payments
while their claim is being adjudicated. Too many veterans are waiting
too long to receive the benefits they earned by answering their
nation's call to service and volunteering to put themselves in harm's
way. With over 524,000 VA disability claims in backlog status, the
nation is failing to live up to its promise to help these veterans when
they return home carrying the injuries of over a decade of war.
The VA's special processing initiative for two-year old claims was
developed and carried out to help alleviate this problem. Over a two-
month period, VBA was able to eliminate almost all two-year old claims
from the backlog and provide provisional ratings based on existing
evidence to those that could not be rated outright. This bill takes the
success of this special processing initiative a step further by
implementing the good faith practice of providing veterans with at
least a portion of the benefits they have earned until their claims
have been fully processed. IAVA supports this bill because it
represents the kind of common sense approach to the disability claims
process veterans deserve.
H.R. 2138
IAVA supports H.R. 2138, the Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog
and Accountability Act, which would direct the VA to end the disability
claims backlog by Memorial Day of 2015 through the implementation of
its strategic plan and require the VA to issue periodic reports on its
progress toward implementation. This bill also mandates timely measures
to increase information sharing between the VA, the Social Security
Administration, and the Department of Defense, along with thorough
training for claims processors.
While IAVA acknowledged the ambitious intent of the VA's relevant
strategic plan when it was announced, we joined many other advocates in
expressing concern that the lacked specific details on how the metrics
in the plan were derived, the data on which those metrics were based,
and sufficient information on how the plan would be implemented. We
also expressed concern that insufficient transparency along the way
toward the VA's 2015 goal would make it hard for outside groups and
Congress to hold the VA accountable for meeting it's own goals. We were
also uncomfortable with the inability or unwillingness of VA leaders to
articulate for Congress or the American public a date in 2015 by which
its backlog-related goals would be accomplished.
This bill seeks to address some of those shortcomings in the VA's
strategic plan, especially with respect to keeping Congress and the
public informed on its progress. America's veterans understand that
goals can only be met when they are clearly defined. IAVA supports this
bill because setting clear benchmarks for ending the backlog increases
the incentive to get the job done and increases the ability of Congress
to hold the responsible parties accountable.
H.R. 2189
IAVA strongly supports H.R. 2189, which would establish a much
needed multi-agency task force or working group to evaluate the
underlying causes of the VA disability claims backlog, facilitate
coordinated remedies to those causes, and help bring outside expertise
to bear on the problems the VA has encountered that have resulted in
the backlog growing as high as it did and persisting for as long as it
has. The existence and work of this task force would in no way impede
the ongoing work of the VA to address problems that have already been
identified, and it would not simply study the matter from afar and
issue a report years later. Instead, the Chairman has smartly and
carefully crafted this bill to ensure that the task force would augment
and support the VA's ongoing work, contribute more added value to that
effort, report on it's findings early and often, and increase
transparency throughout the process.
The VA is certainly already working to address some of these issues
and the confidence deficit that has resulted through reforms such as
moving to an all-electronic filing system, increasing access to
information, increasing staffing bandwidth and training, coordinating
better with other elements within the VA, and communicating more
efficiently and effectively with the Department of Defense and other
executive agencies. All of these are welcomed reforms, but even the VA
admits that there are still snags and challenges with which it needs
help. The formation and existence of such a task force would facilitate
getting the VA that coordination and outside help, and would also be an
important facilitator of looking ahead to potential future challenges
so that we do not wind up in this unfortunate situation again. IAVA
strongly supports this bill and stresses again that it would in no way
impede the good work and progress that the VA is already making on the
backlog. Instead, this bill and the resulting task force would only
help speed up that process and get the VA the information, resources,
and expertise it needs to meet its goals. That is, after all, the
common goal of IAVA, other military and veteran service organizations,
this Committee, and the VA.
H.R. 2341
IAVA takes no position on H.R. 2341, the Veterans Pension
Protection Act, which aims to protect against financial gamesmanship in
the pension claims process. The intent of this bill is to avoid
unnecessary payment of pension compensation due to fraud and
mischaracterized or hidden existing resources, but we also understand
that some of our colleague veteran and military service organizations
have concerns about how this specific proposal could impact veteran
pensioners in other ways. IAVA acknowledges and appreciates the
principles this bill is seeking to uphold and believes that all
reasonable efforts should be made to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse
from government spending. However, at this time we take no position on
this particular piece of legislation.
H.R.2382
IAVA supports H.R. 2382, the Prioritizing Urgent Claims for
Veterans Act, which would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
prioritize claims of veterans who are terminally ill or suffering from
life-threatening illnesses, and those veterans who are 70 years of age
or older. The VA is currently processing over 833,000 disability
claims, over 547,000 of which are in backlog status. These claims
represent actual veterans experiencing actual hardships and health
issues related to their service. One approach the VA has recently
adopted to address this issue is the fast-tracking of claims for
veterans experiencing financial hardship, homeless veterans, terminally
ill veterans, former POWs, and Purple Heart recipients. This bill would
codify a mandate to fast-track some of those categories of veterans,
the principle behind which the VA seems to already support. IAVA
likewise supports this bill because it expands on a practice that
ensures that our nation's most vulnerable veterans are provided with
the benefits they have earned quickly and effectively.
H.R. 2423
IAVA supports H.R. 1623, the Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical
Exams Improvement Act, which would extend the temporary authority of
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to contract with physicians to
perform disability examinations through December 31, 2016. It would
also extend the ability of a greater number of VA regional offices to
use, thereby augmenting the ability of the VA to quickly and
efficiently complete more claims.
The VBA's special claims processing initiative for two-year old
claims demonstrated how speeding up the medical exam portion of the
claim development process can help reduce the overall time for
developing and processing a claim. IAVA supports this bill because it
expands upon measures to make the disability claim filing process more
convenient for veterans and more efficient for the system, which will
in turn help clear the backlog quicker.
With over 833,000 claims pending and over 547,000 in backlog status
as of this week, we should all be united in supporting every reasonable
action to ensure that veterans can receive the benefits they earned in
a timely and effective manner. IAVA has helped make this a top priority
this year, and we will continue to push, pressure, publicize, and
prioritize the disability claims backlog issue until we all succeed in
finally ending the VA backlog.
Mr. Chairman, we at IAVA again appreciate the opportunity to offer
our views on these important pieces of legislation, and we look forward
to continuing to work with each of you, your staff, and the
Subcommittee to improve the lives of veterans and their families.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Prepared Statement of Heather Ansley, Esq., MSW
Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, and other distinguished
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify
regarding VetsFirst's views on the bills under consideration today.
VetsFirst, a program of United Spinal Association, represents the
culmination of over 60 years of service to veterans and their families.
We provide representation for veterans, their dependents and survivors
in their pursuit of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits and
health care before VA and in the federal courts. Today, we are not only
a VA-recognized national veterans service organization, but also a
leader in advocacy for all people with disabilities.
World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act (H.R. 1288)
This legislation would provide individuals who served as coastwise
merchant seamen during World War II with additional ways to prove their
service. According to the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 (Public Law
95-202) and the Veterans Programs Enhancement Act of 1998 (Public Law
105-368), merchant mariners may use the following documentation to
prove their eligibility for VA benefits: certificate of shipping and
discharge forms, continuous discharge books, and company letters
showing vessel names and dates of voyages. However, these forms of
documentation are not always available.
For individuals without applicable Coast Guard shipping or
discharge forms, a ship logbook, a merchant mariner's document or Z-
card, or other official employment record, Social Security
Administration records in conjunction with validated testimony given by
the individual or his or her primary next of kin that the individual
performed such service will be acceptable proof. In the case of
documentation that has been destroyed or is unavailable, other official
documentation shall be accepted. Providing such proof would allow these
individuals to be eligible for burial benefits; medals, ribbons, and
decorations; and the ability to identify as a veteran.
We support this bipartisan legislation and urge its swift passage.
Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act (H.R. 1494)
Veterans who served on vessels in and around the waters of Vietnam
often face difficulties in proving they were exposed to Agent Orange.
In order to benefit from presumed exposure to Agent Orange in filing a
claim for disability benefits, veterans must prove that the vessels on
which they served traveled on Vietnam's inland waterways or that the
ship was docked to the shore or pierside and they disembarked (``boots
on the ground''). Otherwise, veterans must actually prove that they
were exposed to Agent Orange, which can be very difficult.
Although being able to obtain official information regarding the
area in which you served is critical for proving exposure to Agent
Orange, VA does not have a full accounting of the locations of all
vessels that served in the waters near Vietnam. Instead, VA must
continue to work with the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop the
information as individual claims are received. This delay contributes
to the backlog and delays benefits for many Vietnam veterans who have
disabilities due to their exposure to Agent Orange.
This legislation would require DOD's Army and Joint Services
Records Research Center (JSRRC) to perform a comprehensive review of
the logs of all ships that served in waters near Vietnam to determine
if the vessels served within the territorial waters of Vietnam.
Specifically, the JSRRC must determine whether a vessel operated in the
territorial waters of the Republic of Vietnam during the period
beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, and where the
ship was located in relation to the shore. Proactively researching this
information will ensure that veterans' claims for service connection
are not delayed due to lack of information under the custody and
control of the federal government.
We urge swift passage of this legislation.
VA Claims Efficiency Through Information Act of 2013 (H.R. 1623)
The backlog in processing initial claims for disability
compensation is well known. Despite numerous efforts to address the
backlog, the difficulty in processing claims in an efficient and timely
manner has continued to elude VA. Addressing the backlog will require
many solutions because the reasons for the backlog are not only found
in the overall claims processing system but also in the customs and
culture of each regional office.
This legislation would require VA to make transparent information
regarding the processing times of claims by regional office and by each
medical condition for which a veteran seeks service connection or an
increased rating. Specifically, VA will be required to post, by
regional office, the average number of days between the date of the
submittal of a claim and the date of the decision, the average number
of days each claim is pending, the quality and accuracy rating of the
claims adjudication process, the number of claims pending, those
pending beyond 125 days and the number of claims completed by current
month, the preceding month, current calendar year, and the preceding
calendar year. This same information is also required by medical
condition.
Although we support this legislation, we believe that the
information collected by medical condition would be more useful if the
following requirements were included. First, we believe that it would
be helpful to consider evaluating processing times for individual
medical conditions by regional office. Reviewing information by
regional office may highlight problems in processing certain claims
that are nationwide in nature versus regional. In addition, instead of
requesting information for each medical condition filed, it would be
more useful to look at the top 10 conditions for which veterans file
for compensation. Otherwise, VA would be forced to provide data for
numerous medical conditions, including those for which very few
veterans actually seek compensation.
With these changes, we believe that this important legislation
would be able to provide data that will not only help to address the
backlog but also serve as an indicator moving forward about resource
allocation and potential problem areas.
To direct the Secretary to provide notice of average times for
processing claims and percentage of claims approved (H.R. 1809)
Veterans now have more options than ever for filing claims for
veterans benefits. In addition to filing claims using traditional paper
forms, veterans are also able to file claims electronically. For
veterans who have identified all of the information needed to prove
their claim, the opportunity to submit a fully developed claim promises
faster processing times and will as of August 6, 2013, allow the
veteran the opportunity to receive up to one year of additional
retroactive benefits. In filing claims, veterans also have the
opportunity to seek the assistance of a veterans service officer or
other individual or to file a claim on their own.
To ensure that veterans are able to make the best educated
decisions regarding their benefits claims, this legislation would
require VA to post information in regional offices, claims intake
facilities and on the Internet regarding processing times and claims
for which benefits are awarded. Specifically, VA will be required to
provide information regarding the average processing time for claims,
whether fully developed or not, and the percentage of claims that were
awarded benefits. VA will also be required to provide information
regarding claims granted by those in which a veteran was represented by
a veterans service organization, those who used the assistance of
another individual under a durable power of attorney, and those in
which the veteran acted on his or her own behalf. Veterans would also
be required to sign a notice when submitting a claim for benefits that
acknowledges that they are aware of this information.
We believe that veterans should have the information they need to
make informed decisions regarding their benefits claims. However, we
are concerned about the requirement for applicants to sign a notice
stating that they are aware of this information. We are not opposed to
ensuring that veterans have information regarding processing times and
claims approved. But we believe that unless the notice is incorporated
into all application forms for VA benefits, the need to receive and
sign a separate form could add another layer to the claims process that
would further delay it.
If our concerns regarding the need to acknowledge receipt of the
notice can be addressed, we think that this legislation would be very
beneficial to veterans and other claimants.
Pay As You Rate Act (H.R. 2086)
Veterans today are filing increasingly complex claims for
disability compensation. For veterans who file claims with multiple
issues, final resolution of all issues in a claim may require a
significant amount of time. Once VA has reached a decision on each
issue in a veteran's claim, the veteran should begin receiving any owed
disability compensation without having to wait for a final adjudication
of all issues raised in his or her claim.
This legislation would require VA to make interim payments of
disability benefits when an issue is favorably decided for the veteran,
as those decisions are made. VA would be required to pay veterans as
they rate individual issues for those claims that require VA to make
decisions with respect to two or more disabilities. We hope that each
decision on an issue will be considered a final decision so that if a
veteran wishes to appeal his or her rating that process will be able to
begin immediately.
We support this legislation and urge is swift passage.
Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and Accountability Act (H.R. 2138)
VetsFirst believes that VA Secretary Eric Shinseki is personally
committed to eliminating the backlog for veterans benefits. VA's
current goal is in 2015 to process initial claims within 125 days of
receipt at 98 percent accuracy. In recent years, however, the backlog
has only continued to grow despite a variety of efforts to stem the
tide.
On January 25, 2013, VA published a strategic plan to accomplish
this goal. The Strategic Plan to Eliminate the Compensation Claims
Backlog addresses the Veterans Benefits Administration's (VBA)
transformation plan which focuses on using people, process, and
technology to end the backlog. Despite indications that VA may finally
be turning the tide on the backlog, many members of Congress and
veterans remain concerned that VA will not be able to finally address
its processing delays. Furthermore, even if processing timelines are
met, it is unclear whether quality will ultimately be sacrificed by
those seeking to ensure that claims are completed within 125 days.
This legislation would require VA to fully implement its strategic
plan to ensure elimination of the claims backlog by Memorial Day 2015.
At that time, all claims should meet VA's goal of processing claims for
disability compensation within 125 days of receipt at 98 percent
accuracy. VA would also be required to provide a supplemental report
that provides metrics and timelines for implementing the plan. To
ensure progress on the plan, the Government Accountability Office would
be required to provide 90 day progress reports to Congress on VA's
implementation.
VetsFirst believes that VA must be held accountable for reaching
the goal of processing initial claims within 125 days of receipt at 98
percent accuracy. No single action will eliminate the claims backlog.
Thus, we believe that requiring a continuing evaluation of the metrics
that will show if progress is being made will be helpful in ensuring
that VA is pursuing the correct policies and procedures and making any
needed course corrections that will help them to succeed. We also
believe, however, that reporting requirements must be carefully
monitored to ensure that the information being collected is needed to
facilitate ending the backlog and not diverting critical resources from
the mission.
In addition, the legislation would also require the expedited
transfer of records under the purview of the Social Security
Administration and DOD. It would also require the development of a plan
to decrease to 30 days that amount of time needed to provide members of
the National Guard and VA with needed medical records. The legislation
would also require a training program to ensure that all newly hired
claims processors receive at least three years of training and
partnering with mentor processors who can assist in the training.
We support the intent of this legislation but believe that
implementation will be key to ensuring success.
To establish a commission or task force to evaluate the backlog of
disability claims of VA (H.R. 2189)
This legislation would create a commission or task force to study
the claims backlog, including the policies and procedures VA uses to
evaluate claims and appeals for veterans benefits. The resulting study
will be a comprehensive evaluation and assessment of the backlog of
claims, an analysis of possible improvements and related issues. As
part of the study, the commission or task force will be required to
consider the interests of veterans, procedural and substantive due
process issues, the responsible use of resources, and the importance of
a veteran friendly claims process. The task force or commission will
also address the backlog of claims and possible improvements to the
claims process, along with a review of the appellate process.
While we believe that VA must act to ensure that the goal of
processing claims within 125 days at 98 percent accuracy is met, we are
concerned that a commission or task force might hinder VA's current
efforts by diverting resources from the overall push to address the
backlog. However, VA must be held accountable for effectively
implementing its Strategic Plan to Eliminate the Compensation Claims
Backlog. A commission or task force that is narrowly focused on VA's
current efforts related to the backlog might have benefit for veterans
and the claims process.
We also believe, however, that there is a need for a more broad-
based commission or task force that will thoroughly evaluate the entire
claims process, including the appeals process. The work of such a
commission or task force should begin with a review of the most recent
commission and task force recommendations, including those of the
Veteran's Disability Benefits Commission and the VA Claims Processing
Task Force. This would allow the task force or commission to evaluate
previous recommendations, and determine whether unimplemented
recommendations would be beneficial in improving the claims process,
and what additional recommendations are needed. The commission or task
force would also need to evaluate the role of technology in claims
processing, the effectiveness of veterans service organizations,
agents, and attorneys in assisting veterans in prosecuting their
claims, and whether the current claims processing system meets the
goals and spirit of actually assisting veterans with their claims.
Any broad-based commission or task force would also need to be
forward thinking and consider claims processing beyond 2015. Although
ending the backlog and increasing claims quality are top priorities, we
must also anticipate the needs of claims processing beyond the next
couple of years. Thus, it should also consider how to maximize
efficiencies that may be afforded through technology and the changing
needs of veterans. Otherwise, we may exchange the backlog or another
set of equally daunting concerns.
We also believe that any broad-based commission or task force
should include a focus on the appeals process. The VA's Office of
Inspector General (OIG) reported in a May 2012 report \1\ that the
inventory of appeals had increased more than 30 percent between fiscal
year 2008 and fiscal year 2010. The OIG's report concluded that,
``VBA's management of appeals was ineffective in providing timely
resolution of veterans' appeals.'' Clearly, a focused review of the
appellate process is needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General,
Veterans Benefits Administration: Audit of VA Regional Office's Appeals
Management Process (May 30, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, we believe that a task force or commission should focus
either on the backlog of initial claims or the broader claims process,
including appeals, but not both. We would ask that either the task
force proposed by this legislation be limited in scope or that the
focus and timeframes be broadened to include all areas of concern.
Veterans Pension Protection Act (H.R. 2341)
VA's pension program provides benefits for veterans who are low-
income and are either permanently and totally disabled, or age 65 and
older, if they served during a period of war. These benefits are
critical for veterans who have few other resources available to them.
Because these benefits are very important to low-income and/or
disabled veterans, we believe that these benefits must be protected to
ensure that they are fully available when needed. As a result, we do
not condone fraudulent efforts to benefit from the VA's pension
program. We also believe, however, that people should not have to
impoverish themselves just to receive the services that they need
whether in VA's program or any other similar government benefits
program.
The look-back proposed in this legislation seeks to preempt efforts
to transfer assets to make veterans eligible for pension benefits.
Without commenting further on the specific merits of this proposal, we
are concerned that the legislation does not exempt transfer of assets
to special needs trusts. Special needs trusts are designed to
supplement the services and supports received by people with
disabilities through Social Security and Medicaid. The funds in a
special needs trust may be used for expenses such as modifying a home
for accessibility, paying for recreational activities, or purchasing
tickets to visit family. If the funds were made directly available to
the individual, then he or she may lose eligibility for Supplemental
Security Income (SSI) benefits and Medicaid services and supports,
which are income dependent. By placing the funds in a special needs
trust, parents can ensure, for instance, that their disabled children
retain eligibility for these crucial benefits and services.
A good example illustrating the importance of special needs trusts
is found in the current quandary with DOD's survivor benefit plan
(SBP). An SBP annuity allows for retiring servicemembers to make a
portion of their retired pay available to their survivors. However,
federal law requires that these benefits must be paid to a ``natural
person.'' Thus, if a child with a disability is in receipt of income
dependent services and supports, then the child may lose these benefits
and services because SBP funds cannot be paid to a special needs trust.
Unfortunately, the amount received from the annuity may not be
sufficient to pay for the services lost. Thus, the child not only loses
eligibility for the services but then is unable to pay for them
privately.
In the November 2011 edition of Exceptional Parent Magazine, Kelly
A. Thompson, an attorney, relayed how this dilemma played out for one
adult child with a disability.
``A recent example concerns a 52 year-old man with an intellectual
disability who had lived in a group home for 18 years and attended a
day program for individuals with disabilities. His only income was SSI
of $674 per month. His SSI benefits and Medicaid paid for his programs
and services. However, when his father, a retired Navy officer, died,
his adult son began to receive military SBP in the amount of $2,030 per
month. This SBP payment made him ineligible for Medicaid waiver
services. The private pay cost of the programs and services he was
receiving prior to his father's death is $8,600 per month, more than
four times his SBP payment. He lost his group home placement, as well
as his day program, and was transferred to a state ``training
center''--a large institutional setting isolated from the community.''
\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Kelly A. Thompson, ``The Dilemma for Military Parents of
Children with Disabilities.'' EP Magazine. November 2011.
People with disabilities greatly benefit from access to special
needs trusts. In the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993,
Congress exempted the transfer of assets for the benefit of a person
with a disability under the age of 65 from the look-back provisions of
the Medicaid program. Thus, not only is a person with a disability able
to benefit greatly from a special needs trust but the transfer of
assets to the trust for the benefit of another does not count against
the transferor in the event that he or she subsequently needs Medicaid
assistance. In light of the importance of special needs trust, it is
clear that these benefits should be available for the disabled children
of veterans, without disadvantaging the veteran in receiving VA pension
benefits if needed.
It should also be noted that a person with a disability who is
under the age of 65 may have his or her own assets transferred into a
special needs trust that directly benefits him or her. These types of
trusts may only be established by a parent, grandparent, legal
guardian, or a court and allow the individual to remain eligible for
Medicaid services and supports. Any remaining funds available at death
must be used to pay-back the Medicaid program for services provided.
Any efforts to penalize transfer of assets under the VA's pension
program must provide for appropriate exemptions for transfers to
special needs trusts similar to those available through other federal
programs also based on financial need.
Prioritizing Urgent Claims for Veterans Act (H.R. 2382)
In cases pending before the Board of Veterans' Appeals, veterans
who are of advanced age (75 years of age or older), suffering severe
financial hardship, or seriously ill may under regulation advance on
the docket. VBA has recently testified that initial claims filed by
veterans who are homeless, terminally ill, or Medal of Honor recipients
or were Prisoners of Wars are processed as expeditiously as possible.
However, there are no similar regulatory or statutory protections for
initial claims.
This legislation would require the Secretary to provide priority
for veterans who are age 70, terminally ill, or who have life-
threatening illnesses. We strongly believe that statutory protections
for our most vulnerable veterans are necessary to ensure that benefits
are available to those who are in the most need. However, we suggest
that this legislation be amended to also include those veterans who are
homeless and those who are suffering severe financial hardship.
We believe ensuring that those veterans who have dire need for
benefits should have priority in claims processing. We hope that this
legislation will be expanded to include other vulnerable veterans and
urge its subsequent passage.
Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical Exams Improvement Act (H.R. 2423)
Veterans who file claims for disability benefits are often
scheduled for medical examinations that will provide VA with the
information needed to evaluate their claims. To ensure that veterans'
claims are not unduly delayed due to the need for medical information,
Congress gave VA the temporary authority to use contract examiners in
the Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-275).
Congress has continued to extend this authority, which currently
expires on December 31, 2013.
This legislation would extend VA's authorization to use contract
physicians to perform examinations required for disability benefits
claims. The authority, which would be extended to December 31, 2016,
would also allow for licensed physicians to travel to other
jurisdictions to perform exams as long as they were conducted pursuant
to VA's contract. Use of the authority would be limited to 15 or fewer
regional offices that will be selected based on the number of
backlogged claims, the total pending case workload, the length of time
cases have been pending, the accuracy of completed claims and the
overall timeliness of completed cases in each region.
We support this legislation because it will not only extend VA's
authority to use contract physicians to perform medical examinations
for compensation purposes but because it will also allow VA to move
resources to the areas with the most need. Veterans who are served by
regional offices that experience high volume and delays should not be
further delayed in receiving an examination if VA already has contract
resources available. We believe that this legislation would provide VA
with another important tool in addressing the backlog.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify concerning VetsFirst's
views on these important pieces of legislation. We remain committed to
working in partnership to ensure that all veterans are able to
reintegrate in to their communities and remain valued, contributing
members of society.
Executive Summary
World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act (H.R. 1288)
We urge swift passage of this legislation.
Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act (H.R. 1494)
We support this legislation because it would provide information
that will facilitate processing disability claims related to Agent
Orange.
VA Claims Efficiency Through Information Act of 2013 (H.R. 1623)
We support this legislation but believe that it would be
strengthened by focusing on the top 10 medical conditions for which
veterans file for compensation as opposed to all conditions.
To direct the Secretary to provide notice of average times for
processing claims and percentage of claims approved (H.R. 1809)
We support this legislation, but are concerned about the need for
applicants to sign a notice acknowledging receipt of the information
due to possible delays in claims processing resulting from failure to
submit it.
Pay As You Rate Act (H.R. 2086)
We support swift passage of this legislation.
Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and Accountability Act (H.R. 2138)
We support the intent of this legislation but believe that
reporting requirements would need to be monitored to ensure that the
information being collected is needed to facilitate ending the backlog.
To establish a commission or task force to evaluate the backlog of
disability claims of VA (H.R. 2189)
We believe that a task force or commission should focus either on
the backlog or the broader claims process, including appeals, but not
both.
Veterans Pension Protection Act (H.R. 2341)
We do not have an official position on this legislation but believe
that any efforts to penalize transfer of assets must provide for
appropriate exemptions for transfers to special needs trusts.
Prioritizing Urgent Claims for Veterans Act (H.R. 2382)
We support passage of this legislation but believe that additional
prioritization categories would be beneficial for our most vulnerable
veterans.
Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical Exams Improvement Act (H.R. 2423)
We support passage of this legislation
Information Required by Clause 2(g) of Rule XI of the House of
Representatives
Written testimony submitted by Heather L. Ansley, Vice President of
Veterans Policy; VetsFirst, a program of United Spinal Association;
1660 L Street, NW, Suite 504; Washington, D.C. 20036. (202) 556-2076,
ext. 7702.
This testimony is being submitted on behalf of VetsFirst, a program
of United Spinal Association.
In fiscal year 2012, United Spinal Association served as a
subcontractor to Easter Seals for an amount not to exceed $5000 through
funding Easter Seals received from the U.S. Department of
Transportation. This is the only federal contract or grant, other than
the routine use of office space and associated resources in VA Regional
Offices for Veterans Service Officers that United Spinal Association
has received in the current or previous two fiscal years.
Statements For The Record
HON. THOMAS J. ROONEY
Last year, I asked my constituents to help my office identify fraud
against our nation's veterans, particularly elderly veterans. Many came
forward to report scams against themselves, their friends and family
members.
One of the most common scams both my constituents and the American
Legion brought to my attention was a practice called ``pension
poaching.'' Here's how it typically works:
Financial advisors and firms seeking to prey on elderly
and disabled veterans - often going into nursing homes under the guise
of offering a ``free lunch seminar'' - promise to help them qualify for
VA pension benefits if they divert their assets into trusts or
annuities.
Currently the VA only considers net worth at the time a
veteran applies for benefits, therefore the Department cannot determine
if an applicant has recently diverted their assets in order to qualify.
The firms profit from those trusts or annuities, but they
are often poor investments for seniors. As a result, victims have lost
access to their savings in exchange for a small pension. Meanwhile, the
VA pension fund is further drained for veterans in need.
These firms further profit by charging veterans
exorbitant fees and selling them additional, costly services.
As a veteran, I am disgusted by the actions of those who would prey
on America's elderly and disabled veterans. These financial predators
are not only scamming elderly veterans out of their life savings,
they're also undermining the VA pension program in the process.
This month, I reintroduced bipartisan legislation to combat this
scam against retired veterans and to strengthen the VA pension program.
I'm proud to have Representatives Kurt Schrader (D-OR), Gus Bilirakis
(R-FL) and Ron Barber (D-AZ) join me as original cosponsors of this
bill, the Protecting Veterans Pensions Act (H.R. 2341).
Our bill would provide a simple solution to stop this scam. H.R.
2341 would eliminate the loophole that allows predators to divert
veterans' assets in order to improperly qualify them for a pension. By
creating a three-year ``look-back'' period to determine eligibility for
the VA pension program, we can ensure that bad actors are not taking
advantage of the system, and ensure the benefits for those veterans
that truly qualify for the program.
Importantly, we have been assured by VA that this will not slow
down the application process for qualified, retired veterans seeking a
pension.
I appreciate the Committee's consideration of our bipartisan bill
to stop scams against our nation's veterans, and hope to see this
legislation move through the House expeditiously.
DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS
Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting DAV (Disabled American Veterans) to testify
at this legislative hearing of the Subcommittee on Disability
Assistance and Memorial Affairs. As you know, DAV is a non-profit
veterans service organization comprised of 1.2 million wartime service-
disabled veterans dedicated to a single purpose: empowering veterans to
lead high-quality lives with respect and dignity. DAV is pleased to be
here today to present our views on the bills under consideration by the
Subcommittee.
H.R. 1288
H.R. 1288, the World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act, would
direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to accept additional
documentation when considering the application for veteran status of an
individual who performed service as a merchant seaman during World War
II.
Specifically, H.R. 1288 would expand methods for validating certain
service considered to be active service by the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs for the purpose of verifying that an individual performed
service under honorable conditions, thereby satisfying the requirements
of a merchant seaman who is recognized pursuant to section 401 of the
GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977.
DAV has no resolution or position on this matter.
H.R. 1494
H.R. 1494, the Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act, would
direct the Secretary of Defense to review the logs of each ship
operating under the authority of the Secretary of the Navy that is
known to have operated in the waters near Vietnam during the Vietnam
era.
Specifically, H.R. 1494 would require the Secretary of Defense to
review all of the ship operation logs to determine if such ship
operated in the territorial waters of Vietnam during the period of
January 9, 1962, to May 7, 1975, noting the specific dates, location
and distance from shore for each ship. This information would then be
provided to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for verification purposes
in support of claims received for entitlement to certain benefits, such
as disability compensation for specific presumptive diseases or
illnesses related to exposure to Agent Orange or other herbicides
containing dioxin.
DAV resolution No. 016, states in part, `` . . . [t]he exclusion of
territorial seas or waters from the term ``Republic of Vietnam'' is
contrary to the plain and unqualified language of the law and illogical
insofar as its premise is that herbicides could be carried away from
the area of application across any expanse of land but not equal or
less expanses of water . . . veterans who served on ships no more
distant from the spraying of dioxin containing herbicides than many who
served on land are arbitrarily and unjustly denied benefits of the
presumption of exposure and thereby the presumption of service
connection for their herbicide-related disabilities.''
Complicating this matter is the VA's demonstrated difficulty in
obtaining information about each ship, and the respective service
members aboard that performed service in the territorial waters, which
may have been exposed to dioxin containing herbicides. This legislation
would improve the process by providing important information and by
accurately identifying all ships serving under the authority of the
Secretary of the Navy.
As such, in accordance with DAV resolution No. 016, we support
enactment of H.R. 1494 and any legislation directed at including the
waters offshore in the phrase ``served in the Republic of Vietnam.''
H.R. 1623
H.R. 1623, the VA Claims Efficiency Through Information Act of
2013, would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make publicly
available certain information about pending and completed claims for
compensation under the laws administered by the Secretary.
Essentially, this legislation would require the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs make specific statistical claims-related information
available and publicly accessible on the VA's website. In particular,
H.R. 1623 would require each VA Regional Office (VARO) to provide
information such as the average number of days pending for a claim and
the quality and accuracy of such claims for the three-month period
immediately preceding enactment and at one year following.
This information would also include the number of claims pending,
the number of claims pending more than 125 days and the number of
claims completed during the current month to date, the preceding
current month, the calendar year and the preceding calendar year.
Similarly, this legislation would require the same type of report from
VAROs which breaks down the aforementioned claims by medical condition.
Additionally, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs would be required to
update this information on the VA's website every seven days.
While a great deal of this type of statistical information is
presently available on VA's website, this legislation requires a more
in-depth breakdown of information about pending claims. One benefit to
making this information available is transparency in the claims
process, the inclusion of the veteran into the process, and potentially
allowing an individual to become more educated about the claims process
even before a claim is submitted; however, we recommend the language of
the bill be expanded to include the specific link to the information
being published on VA's website in every notice sent to a veteran.
DAV supports the intent of H.R. 1623 of making this type of
information available on VAs website, however, we are concerned about
the possibility that this legislation, if enacted, may cause more work
for VA at a time when the primary focus is directed at reducing the
backlog of claims.
H.R. 1809
H.R. 1809 would amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide notice of average times for
processing claims and percentage of claims approved. The goal of
legislation is to encourage veterans to seek the assistance of veterans
service organizations (VSOs) and file claims for VA benefits using the
Fully Developed Claim (FDC) process.
H.R. 1809 would make available to all current and potential veteran
claimants useful information regarding the success or allowance rate of
claims in each VARO by requiring the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
publish this information on VA's website. Additionally, this
information will be required to be conspicuously posted in every VARO
and, when a claim is received, VA will notify the claimant of such
information, including information about the benefit of filing a FDC,
such as faster processing time and eligibility to receive up to an
extra year of benefit payments.
The type of information this legislation is seeking to publicize to
every claimant is the average processing time of claims and the
percentage of allowed or granted claims for those with representation
versus those without representation. Additionally, H.R. 1809 will
require the information to be broken down into the percentage of claims
that were FDC submitted electronically versus paper as compared to
those who do not file their claims through the FDC program in
electronic, standard paper or non-standard paper form.
DAV supports the principle of this legislation, which is to bring
better awareness and information to a claimant prior to filing a claim
for benefits, similar to H.R. 1623. However, H.R. 1809 is directed at
providing more in-depth information to a claimant about representation
in keeping with the primary goal of encouraging claimants to submit
their claims for benefits through the FDC program.
DAV agrees with providing and making available information about
the percentage of claims allowed for those with representation versus
those without representation. We also agree with encouraging claimants
to submit their claims through the FDC process, as is a standard
practice for DAV. Nonetheless, DAV believes, in order to fully reach
the goal of this legislation and, more importantly, to benefit the
claimant in the best way possible, the posted information should
provide a breakdown of the number of claims represented and the
allowance rate for each VSO and for representatives other than VSOs.
Otherwise, this information may not allow an individual to make an
informed decision about representation. Moreover, when publishing this
type of information, it should include the fact that DAV and other VSOs
provide representation to virtually any claimant in the process, with
the exception of frivolous or fraudulent claims. Conversely, others
providing representation, including attorneys, tend to be much more
selective in their representation; often choosing to represent only
claims wherein the predicted outcome is favorable to the claimant. DAV
believes this should also be made clear to a claimant in the published
information.
Like H.R. 1623, DAV supports the intent of H.R. 1809, which will
require VA to make this information available to claimants; however, we
are concerned about the possibility that this legislation, if enacted,
may cause more work for VA at a time when their primary focus is
directed at reducing the backlog of claims.
H.R. 2086
H.R. 2086, the Pay as You Rate Act, would direct the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs to make interim payments of disability compensation
benefits for any disability for which a decision can be rendered prior
to the complete adjudication of such claim. Currently, when VA receives
a claim with multiple contentions and some issues can be adjudicated
and finalized and others need further development, VA can make a
decision to grant or deny specific issues and defer those needing
further development.
Although VA can finalize and initiate payment for those issues
ready-to-rate, they simply defer final action until all issues,
specifically those needing development, have been completed. According
to VA, this allows them to produce one rating only; however, with
development being the major reason for delay in most claims this means
compensation for the other ready-to-rate conditions must wait - the
veteran must wait.
Moreover, VA already has the authority to do what this legislation
seeks, to provide interim compensation payments, or rather, initiate
compensation payments for those issues that can be finalized without
delay. VA, for their own convenience, chooses not to take such action
rather than taking action that is more beneficial to a veteran.
In accordance with DAV resolution No. 205, we support enactment of
H.R. 2086, as it will codify and require the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs to provide compensation payments for those conditions that can
be finalized, thereby providing financial support to many veterans much
sooner in the process.
H.R. 2138
H.R. 2138, the Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and
Accountability Act, contains several provisions intended to help reduce
the backlog of pending veterans' disability compensation claims. The
legislation seeks to address several of the key findings and
recommendations contained in the General Accountability Office (GAO)
report (GAO-13-89) on claims processing issued in December 2012.
Section 3 of the bill would require the Secretary to eliminate the
backlog by May 25, 2015 (Memorial Day), and to submit to Congress a
report containing detailed timelines and metrics with which to judge
VA's progress toward meeting that goal. Three years ago, Secretary
Shinseki established the goal of having all claims adjudicated within
125 days with 98 percent accuracy by 2015; however, no specific end
date or interim goals were stated. In January of this year, VA
transmitted to Congress its ``Strategic Plan to Eliminate the
Compensation Claims Backlog,'' which contained an overview of the
claims transformation strategy developed by VBA over the past several
years, but it did not include interim milestones.
DAV and other major VSOs involved in assisting veterans file claims
have been regularly consulted by VBA on most of the initiatives and
programs included in this plan, including Fully Developed Claims
(FDCs), Disability Benefit Questionnaires (DBQs) and the Veterans
Benefits Management System (VBMS), and we support the implementation of
this plan. However, we have consistently called for stronger oversight
to ensure that VBA is on the right track to reform the claims process
so that every claim is decided right the first time, not just to
eliminate the current backlog.
By requiring detailed timelines and metrics with which to judge the
progress of the transformation plan, this provision would provide
Congress and VSOs with valuable tools to better judge VBA's progress,
and to help make recommendations for course corrections, if they are
necessary. Regarding the end date for eliminating the backlog, we would
recommend that the Secretary be required to include with the interim
goals required by this Section a specific end date in 2015 in order to
properly set expectations inside and outside of VBA. With that small
change, we would strongly support this section.
Section 6 of the bill would require GAO to issue progress reports
on how well VBA is implementing its plan and meeting the specific
timelines and targets required by Section 3 discussed above. We support
this provision to provide an additional independent perspective on
whether VBA is on track to meet its stated goals and offer expert
recommendations to improve the claims process.
Section 4 of the bill would require VA to enter into agreements
with the Social Security Administration (SSA) and Department of Defense
(DOD) to require both agencies to transfer records requested by VA to
adjudicate claims for disability compensation within 30 days of VA's
request. This provision would also require VA and DOD to develop and
submit to Congress a plan to ensure that National Guard medical records
are also transferred to VA within 30 days of a request.
The longest delays in processing compensation claims result from
incomplete medical, service and financial records needed to support the
claim. While all delays in receiving records are problematic, it is
simply unacceptable to have such delays for records in the custody of
federal or state governmental agencies, and therefore DAV supports this
section of the bill. Furthermore, in order to strengthen this Section,
we recommend that language be included so that federal or state
agencies that are not able to comply with such record requests in the
timeframes established be required to respond in writing stating a
reason for their failure time they are unable to comply.
Section 5 of the bill seeks to strengthen VBA's training programs
for new employees by requiring such training to continue for three
years. DAV has long called for increasing the quality and quantity of
training provided to VBA's claims processors, not just for new
employees, but for all employees as part of a continuing education
program, and thus we support the intention of this section. However,
the bill's language does not provide specific details of how the
proposed three-year training program for new employees would be
different than current training, including on-the-job-training and
mentoring programs, or how it would affect continuing education
programs. We would be pleased to work with the Committee to develop
more specific proposals that could improve all of VA's training
programs.
H.R. 2189
H.R. 2189 would establish a commission or task force to study and
report on the causes of the backlog of compensation claims and make
recommendations on how to improve VA's claims adjudication and appeals
process. The bill would require the first report to be delivered to
Congress within 60 days of the first meeting of the commission or task
force, require additional interim reports every 30 days thereafter, and
require the final report to be issued 180 days after the first meeting.
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs would be required to either implement
the recommendations of the commission or task force, or submit to
Congress a justification for failing to implement any recommendations.
The commission or task force would be composed of 15 individuals
appointed by Congressional and Administration leaders, approximately
half of whom are required to be veterans. The commission or task force
itself would then appoint five nonvoting, nonmember advisors from VSOs,
and would have a mandate to seek advice from additional outside
experts.
Over the past several years, there has been a renewed and
intensified focus put on resolving the longstanding systemic problems
plaguing VA's claims processing system. Facing a growing backlog of
pending claims; projecting a sharp rise in the number to be filed in
the future; and realizing that its paper-based system was no longer
capable of managing its workload, VBA in 2009 reached out to VSOs
involved in the claims process to seek our input on how to develop a
new system. VBA leadership admitted that their old system was broken
and committed to building a new system based on the paradigm of getting
each claim done right the first time.
Since then, DAV and other VSOs have worked closely and
collaboratively with VBA to develop, review and oversee the
implementation of dozens of new initiatives designed to improve the
people, processes and technology that adjudicate claims for disability
compensation and other benefits. During this time, GAO has also closely
studied the problems and issued numerous reports and testimonies,
making detailed recommendations. In addition, the Advisory Commission
on Disability Compensation (ACDC), statutorily established as follow-on
to the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC), has also
provided oversight and input to VBA over the past four years, bringing
additional outside expertise and perspective to bear on claims
processing reform, and continues in this role today.
And of course Congress has and continues to vigorously examine the
causes of the backlog and review VBA's plans to design and build a new
processing system. Both House and Senate authorization and
appropriations committees have conducted dozens of hearings and made
numerous recommendations on how to improve the claims process, address
the current backlog of claims, and prevent future backlogs from
recurring. There have been new studies and reports required, as well as
new statutory changes approved to streamline VBA's processes, often in
consultation with both VBA and VSOs.
Just last month, the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs held an
insightful roundtable discussion bringing insurance industry experts
together with VBA's compensation experts to see how private sector
experience might benefit the current transformation efforts. DAV and
our partners in The Independent Budget have recommended that a similar
panel of outside, private sector experts from major IT companies review
the progress of VBMS.
Over the past year, VBA has rolled out most of the major components
of its transformation plan to all of its Regional Offices, including
the Transformation Organizational Model and the VBMS. Individual
initiatives, such as FDC, Disability Benefit Questionnaires (DBQs), and
Quality Review Teams (QRTs), have also been implemented and VBA is
starting to realize the benefits of these new programs. Legislative
changes made over the past couple of years to streamline unnecessary or
burdensome steps in the claims process are also just being implemented.
Given all of the research, discussion, consultation and planning
that has taken place over the past several years, as well as the
implementation and rollouts that have only recently taken place, we
believe that the timing is not right for a new commission or task force
focused on the causes of the backlog, or developing new solutions,
until the current plan has had time to take full effect. In fact, there
is beginning to be some concrete evidence that measurable progress is
being made.
The number of claims currently pending on Monday, June 24th, was
approximately 802,000, which is down from approximately 889,000 two
months earlier. The number of claims pending over 125 days, VBA's
official target for backlogged claims, has also fallen over the past
two months from 611,000 to about 524,000 claims. There is still a long
way to go before it is certain that these reductions will continue at
this pace, or whether the transformation is working as planned, however
at this juncture we believe that VBA's focus should remain on
optimizing the transformation rather than considering new changes
before the new system has had sufficient time to operate. For the above
reasons, we do not support this legislation at this time.
H.R. 2341
H.R. 2341, the Veterans Pension Protection Act, would amend title
38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
consider the resources of individuals applying for pension that was
recently disposed of by the individuals for less than fair market value
when determining the eligibility of such individuals for such pension.
DAV has no resolution or position on this matter.
H.R. 2382
H.R. 2382, the Prioritizing Urgent Claims for Veterans Act, would
amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a priority for the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs in processing certain claims for
compensation. This legislation seeks to codify an existing practice
within VA, which is to process compensation claims with expedience and
priority for those veterans who are age 70 or older, terminally ill,
suffering life-threatening illness, financially destitute, homeless, or
other grave situation. However, H.R. 2382 limits the claimants included
to be veterans age 70 or older, terminally ill, or with life-
threatening illness.
While we certainly appreciate the principle of this legislation to
codify this existing practice, we believe it is unnecessary as the VA
generally has no difficulty with their current practice expeditiously
advancing the claims of individuals who are experiencing extreme or
grave situations or circumstances. In fact, if this practice is
codified it may be detrimental to some claimants by limiting the
classification of circumstances. In doing so, H.R. 2382 would adversely
impact VAs ability to determine priority or urgency for many claimants
with severe circumstances, other than those included.
H.R. 2423
H.R. 2423, the Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical Exams
Improvement Act, would extend and expand VA's authority to enter into
contracts with private physicians to conduct medical disability
examinations as an important tool in processing the volume of pending
and future claims for disability compensation. Under this legislation,
VA's authority to contract for disability examinations would be
extended until December 31, 2016; it is currently set to expire at the
end of this year. The bill would also expand from 10 to 15 the number
of VA Regional Offices (VAROs) that could participate in this pilot
program. Finally, the legislation would allow licensed physicians under
a VA contract who are performing disability examinations for claims to
conduct such examinations in any state without having to be licensed in
that particular state.
Over the past decade, DAV National Service Officers (NSOs) have
found that the quality and timeliness of compensation exams conducted
by contractors was generally as good - sometimes better - than
disability exams conducted by VA physicians, who are usually more
focused on treating veterans rather than evaluating their disabilities
under the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities. Moreover, with demand
for VA medical care rising, it is important that VA's treating
physicians, especially specialists, remain focused on providing high
quality care to their patients. In addition, the more technologically-
advanced and user-friendly scheduling and IT systems used by some
contractors has also contributed to higher customer satisfaction scores
from veterans receiving contract exams. For these reasons, we support
extending the authorization for at least an additional three years to
ensure that VBA continues to have this tool to help reach timely claims
decisions. We would even recommend that VA consider whether it might be
more cost efficient to extend the authorization further than three
years if that would help to reduce the average annual cost and conserve
precious budgetary resources.
For many of the reasons above, we also support expanding the pilot
program to more than 10 VAROs; in fact we don't believe it's necessary
to place an arbitrary cap on the number of VAROs allowed to use
contract exams. The decision to use or not use contract examinations is
and should be determined solely by VA and VAROs participating in the
current pilot program based on their workload, local capacity and
available resources. If contract disability compensation exams provide
the same or better quality and timeliness, at the same or less cost per
exam compared to the actual cost of using VA physicians, we find no
compelling reason to limit their use to only 10 or even 15 VAROs. As
such, we recommend that the Committee consider removing altogether the
limitation on the number of participating VAROs, thereby allowing each
individual VARO to determine when and if they use contract exams,
basing their decisions solely on the best interest of veterans.
DAV does not have a resolution on allowing licensed physicians to
conduct medical disability examinations across state lines and we have
no position on that section of the bill.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony and I would be happy to
answer any questions from you or members of the Subcommittee.
PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA
Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, and members of the
Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) would like to thank
you for the opportunity to offer our views on legislation impacting the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that is pending before the
Subcommittee. These important bills will help ensure that veterans
receive the best services available to them.
H.R. 1288, the ``World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act''
While PVA recognizes the valuable service provided by the Merchant
Marines during World War II, PVA has no position on H.R. 1288, the
``World War II Merchant Mariner Service Act.''
H.R. 1494, the ``Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability Act''
PVA supports H.R. 1494, the ``Blue Water Navy Ship Accountability
Act.''
H.R. 1623, the ``VA Claims Efficiency Through Information Act of 2013''
PVA supports H.R. 1623, the ``VA Claims Efficiency Through
Information Act of 2013.'' Providing more information to veterans with
claims pending would seem to be particularly beneficial. Requiring the
Secretary to maintain an internet website to provide this information
is both an efficient and accessible method to inform veterans who may
have claims pending. In addition, providing the numbers by regional
office (RO) allows a better and more objective examination of the
success of the various ROs as well as their success in processing
claims for specific medical conditions.
H.R. 1809
PVA supports H.R. 1809. Like H.R. 1623, it will provide greater
information to a veteran submitting a claim. Providing information on
average wait times for claims processing and the percentage of claims
approved will increase the understanding of the process and may help
set expectations of how long a veteran may have to wait for a claim to
be adjudicated.
H.R. 2086, the ``Pay As You Rate Act''
PVA strongly supports H.R. 2086, the ``Pay As You Rate Act.'' While
reducing the backlog and providing timely disability ratings should
remain the number one priority for all involved, in reality it is
critical to focus on the immediate needs of many veterans with
disabilities who await receipt of benefits. At present, veterans who
have been waiting for a decision on their initial claims endure
hardships during transition from service, particularly among service
members and veterans living with disabilities, family responsibilities,
unemployment, and other adjustment issues. Those with complex claims
(8+ issues, severe disabilities, mental and poly traumas) face barriers
to health access and economic hardship and they will benefit most from
a timely decision on an initial claim for VA benefits. It does not make
sense that payment and benefits should be delayed even though a
decision on a specific disability has been made by the Secretary. While
this will not solve the problem of unmet needs for disabled veterans
who are waiting for their final decision, it will begin providing
access to care, benefits and financial assistance that is so critical
to an improved quality of life.
H.R. 2138, the ``Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog and Accountability
Act''
PVA supports H.R. 2138, the ``Ending VA Claims Disability Backlog
and Accountability Act,'' but with a key modification. While we
understand the desire to codify VA's plan and stated deadline to reduce
the backlog, PVA believes that setting Memorial Day 2015 as the date
for achieving the VA standard of a claim approved or denied within 125
days after the date of submission with a 98 percent accuracy date is
arbitrary. PVA is not aware that VA has ever identified a specific date
in 2015 to reach its goal. PVA has always believed that this was an
intentional decision by VA to allow the greatest flexibility to either
use the end of Fiscal Year 2015 or the end of Calendar Year 2015 to
meet its goal. PVA does not believe it matters which date is used as
long as the requirement is met. If the VA can achieve the desired
outcome by Memorial Day 2015, PVA would be extremely pleased; however,
we feel that making this a legislative requirement places an additional
burden on VA that is unnecessary. That being said, PVA supports and has
always supported the need for milestones and targets that allow
congressional oversight and measures of progress toward the 2015 goal
that VA seems unwilling to more clearly establish or define.
H.R. 2189
PVA does not support H.R. 2189, which would establish a commission
or task force to evaluate the backlog of disability claims of VA. PVA
believes that the time has passed for a commission to examine the
claims backlog and instead aggressive oversight is needed, which the
Committee has been attempting with VA. VA has committed to eliminating
the backlog by 2015 and we believe that they are working toward this
goal in good faith. In fact, the backlog has been reduced.
Currently there are approximately 802,000 pending claims, which is
down over 80,000 from April 2013. The number of pending claims over 125
days has fallen in the same period by almost 90,000. Now is not the
time to consider changes to the system which will simply be a
distraction. Constant changes and distractions as ``new ideas'' were
tried or studied have in many ways hurt efforts to reduce the backlog
and should not be attempted now.
However, there are issues that the Committee should continue to
aggressively pursue. PVA feels that VA needs to publicly establish
milestones and measures of effectiveness, sharing those with Congress
and stakeholders. We find it hard to believe that VA does not have its
own internal milestones to know if it is making progress on the
backlog. If this is the case, the Secretary should publish these
milestones. If VA does not have milestones, it is even more important
for the Secretary to explain why and also to explain how he is tracking
progress without them.
H.R. 2382, the ``Prioritizing Urgent Claims for Veterans Act''
PVA is unsure of the necessity of H.R. 2382, the ``Prioritizing
Urgent Claims for Veterans Act.'' In fact, VA is already taking these
steps when necessary. While PVA understands the intent, the legislation
seems arbitrary. For example, the legislation uses age 70 as a
determining factor, however, a 65 year old may be in a much more
difficult situation and in need of claims adjudication whereas a 70
year old may be much better off both financially and physically. In
addition, the proposed language doesn't mention ``financial hardship''
as a condition. PVA would recommend this be included which would
potentially help widows awaiting DIC and veterans on Pension with
static, catastrophic injuries. These are the ones most often impacted
by the backlog.
H.R. 2423, the ``Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical Exams Improvement
Act''
PVA supports H.R. 2423, the ``Disabled Veterans' Access to Medical
Exams Improvement Act.'' VA has had great success with the use of
contract physicians. Extending the temporary authority until December
31, 2016 will further support the effort to reduce the backlog and then
provide additional authority for a year beyond VA's backlog reduction
goal to ensure the ability to maintain the 125 day decision goal. More
importantly, if VA misses its 2015 backlog reduction target, contracted
physicians will still be available to continue supporting the process
with no additional legislation required.
Mr. Chairman, we would like to thank you once again for allowing us
to address this legislation. PVA would be pleased to take any questions
for the record.
Information Required by Rule XI 2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives
Pursuant to Rule XI 2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives, the
following information is provided regarding federal grants and
contracts.
Fiscal Year 2013
No federal grants or contracts received.
Fiscal Year 2012
No federal grants or contracts received.
Fiscal Year 2011
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, administered by the Legal
Services Corporation--National Veterans Legal Services Program--
$262,787.
J. DON HORTON
Dear Chairman Runyan,
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to submit testimony in
support of H. R. 1288, and the forgotten services of some 10 to 30
thousand members of the Merchant Marine who sailed on coastwise barges
and tugs during World War II. Most have gone unrecognized for their
gallant service in defense of this country when all were needed to
support our troops overseas and keep the enemy from our doors. H. R.
1288 would finally correct the travesty of not recognizing the service
of these individuals and give the few remaining men and women a shot at
gaining recognition as veterans.
The United States Merchant Marine has been largely viewed by the
general population as large ships sailing across oceans and seas
carrying exotic cargo from one country to another. Little information
to what actually takes place within the service is known or understood
by the public. Most citizens have little knowledge that our Merchant
Marine was established before our United States Navy or Coast Guard,
and many do not know that during our nation's wars our Merchant Marine
is looked upon as the Fourth Arm of Defense.
As you know, the United States' effort to fight and win the
greatest war in history was comprised of a coalition of civilians and
servicemembers from the greatest generation this nation has ever known.
There were three major components in that coalition, our fighting
forces overseas, the civilian production machine here at home and, the
United States Merchant Marine that served as the link.
Our Merchant Marine has proven itself time and again in every war
we have encountered. History has consistently noted the brave seamen
who crossed oceans carrying our troops and war materials in every war,
and who often encountered enemy actions that sent many of those brave
souls to the bottom of the seas. Stories have been written about their
heroic efforts to keep our shipping lanes open even while losing ships
enemy hostilities here on our own shores during World War II. At times,
during World War II, we were losing our ships faster than they could be
built. The commanders of the German U-boats considered the waters off
the east coast to be a shooting gallery because of our lack of security
and adherence to keeping our shoreline dark. The bright lights from the
various amusement parks and residential areas along the coastal beaches
provided the perfect backdrop for German U-boats to pick our ships off
at will.
We fought World War II on a global scale, with major fighting on
three fronts. Logistics for this war in terms of supplies reached a
scale never since matched. The supply lines to our front lines
stretched across both oceans. They were very vulnerable, especially at
the very start of the war. Our nation was caught off guard by the
magnitude of the logistical effort required to maintain our front
lines. Every effort was made to keep our troops adequately supplied by
working around the clock in our defense plants. Every able bodied
person, rather it be man, woman or child stood up to do their part.
This nation came together like no other time to produce the supplies
required to keep that war effort moving forward. This effort has not
been matched since, and probably will never be again.
The task of transporting our troops and the majority of materials
overseas fell to our Merchant Marine. The United States had a very
small inventory of ships that could carry our troops and supplies, and
the German U-Boats were sinking them faster than we could build new
ones. Enemy submarine successes threatened the outcome of the war in
the first few years. In fact, the loss of shipping along our coastline
during the first part of the war was so great that our own government
had to step in and instruct our news outlets not to give out the number
of ships lost. There was fear that our seamen would refrain from
shipping out, thereby creating critical manpower shortages. This would
have caused shipping delays and quite possibly could have placed our
chances of winning the war in jeopardy. Had it not been for the gallant
efforts of merchant seamen manning vessels against threatening odds,
the war could have ended much differently.
The great loss of ships caused our nation to call upon another
group of vessels that had generally been placed out of service. Our
country had some 250-300 old wooden hulled barges that were rarely
used. Most had long passed their effective life span. Some were built
around the middle of the nineteenth century and their condition was
poor. Many barges began their life as sail schooners in the mid-1800s.
There was a short-lived belief that sails would help propel these
barges and give the tugboats towing them a little help. By the turn-of-
the-century most had their masts removed and extra hatches added to the
hulls to carry more cargo.
There were some seventy companies that did business in the coastal
trades, and about 700 barges or schooners were recorded as actively
participating. Records indicate the first wooden hulled barge was built
around 1856 and maybe the last around 1923. They ranged in sizes in
tonnage from 600 to 2400 tons. During World War II there may have been
a little more than a few hundred barges remaining to carry out this
tradition.
After the turn of the 20th century, companies began to send the
barges out into larger bodies of waters. Soon the coastwise trade for
barges was where the money was for companies. A tow of three barges
could carry more payload of, say coal, than several locomotives could
carrying 300 coal cars or 600 trucks carrying the same payload and at a
fraction of the cost.
Shortly after the outbreak of World War II, it became apparent that
we needed every possible source of commerce to keep our supplies lines
open. These barges were quickly called back into service even in their
very old and primitive conditions. It was not uncommon to see ten or
twenty tugs and their barges moving cargo up and down the coast on any
given day. As demand for commerce grew the barges began playing a
larger role in the defense of our country. After all, no other mode of
transportation could offer the benefits at lesser costs. They were by
far the most economical means to move product around the country.
The German U-boats sank our ships faster than we could build them.
Larger and faster ships were needed to keep our shipping lanes open and
to keep our troops overseas supplied with badly needed materials. Here
at home, every available means of moving war materials to our defense
plants became a necessity, regardless of the risk.
These barges kept alive a tradition dating back before the birth of
this nation. Our forefathers brought this lifestyle with them when they
landed here to establish this country. Families were traditional on
some of the barges. This emanated from the river barges that traveled
the major tributaries of our nation for as long as this nation has
existed. Our major source of commerce came by river throughout our
country. Often the crew that manned some of these barges during the
summer school breaks was comprised solely by families. Companies who
owned these barges looked favorably on those that were manned by
families. It was believed families would remain on board more so than
single seamen mainly because of the primitive living conditions
generally found on most barges. Families tend to adapt more easily.
Barge seamen endured a life that was extremely primitive as most
barges were without the average necessities found ashore. There was no
electricity, running water or the usual bathroom conveniences. Heat
came from a simple coal stove that was used for cooking as well. Light
from kerosene lamps was the norm. This life was hard and it left its
mark on you. With the ever present German U-boats, young seamen matured
fast. This was a far cry from a young man's dream of sailing the 7
seas.
These coastwise barge seamen were a small, dedicated and mostly
unknown group who served in the US Merchant Marine. They made little
news but played a very important role during World War II. They moved
bulk cargo and war supplies to the various defense factories and power
plants along the East Coast. Minimal news or entries in history were
made as most gave little attention to them. They were considered by
many as insignificant. Historians wrote limited information and they
would only make news if something disastrous happened. Storms would
cause sufficient damage and some would make the news if fatalities
occurred. History passed them by and carried their records along with
it.
Since the younger and more able-bodied seamen preferred the large
more modern ships, barges were more or less left to others less
traditional crews. Some elderly seamen came back to the sea and brought
their families to serve as members of the crew. This brought forth a
resurge in the traditional use of barge families. Many women who were
refused opportunities to work on the larger vessels came aboard the
barges as crew as well. Some of the seamen that came to work on the
barges were without the credentials now required to prove service on
these vessels. They worked alongside those with credentials and were
paid the same wages with the same taxes withheld. They performed the
same work and were exposed to the same threats as the certified seamen
were. Yet, today, many of the seamen that operated tugs and barges
cannot prove their service because they do not have the proper
documents that others were provided. Many were directly denied
documents because of their age, gender or disability. Today we call
this discrimination.
Many seamen were considerably older than the required draft age and
often disabled. Many were missing a leg, arm or an eye. School age
children manned the crew positions as well as any other seamen. They
proved their mettle. These barges carried the bulk raw war materials to
the ports that fed the defense plants that built war supplies and
equipment for our troops overseas. The use of these barges freed our
larger merchant fleet to concentrate on the vital necessity of
transporting supplies and equipment to our troops on the front lines.
This was not a small task.
At the start of the war, women tried repeatedly to join the US
Merchant Marine. They were thwarted by the War Shipping Administrator
(WSA), Admiral Emory S. Land who declared that there was no place in
the Merchant Marine for women. By this order from the WSA, the US Coast
Guard refused to document women who served. Women served anyway and
performed every duty asked of them, without any formal recognition
their work. They served on barges and other vessels, mostly as cooks
and messmen. They were paid salaries and Social Security taxes were
taken from their wages. They performed the same services as those with
proper credentials on the same vessels and did it well. They deserve to
be recognized for their service to our country.
Efforts to gain status as seamen by the women were met with stern
denials from the Captains of the Port (COTP) stationed at the various
coastal ports. I was present in June of 1942, when the COTP of New York
denied my mother and sister their official documentation as seamen.
Instead he issued an official US Coast Guard Identification Card to my
mother and told her my sister did not need one as she was below the age
of 16. Children could move about freely through the security
checkpoints on the docks if accompanied by a parent. He stated by order
of the WSA, he was directed to deny official seaman's papers to women
upon application.
Thousands of other women were denied official documentation for
service in the Merchant Marine. To this day, there has been no way for
these women to gain their due recognition as seamen of the United
States Merchant Marine and thus gain veterans status of this nation. A
letter from the US Coast Guard (attached) dated 09 Apr, 2010, states,
``The US Government did not issue mariner credentials to females during
World War II.''
Recent research of 29 barges and tugs brought forth over 1100
seamen who served between 1942 and 1943. From that group there were 87
seamen with traditionally female names who served aboard those vessels.
That transmits to a ratio of almost 9 percent of the work-force being
women, if one could use this finding to be an approximate ratio of
seamen who served on coastwise vessels. In today's military service,
where women are recognized for their service, the ration is placed at
14%. This finding provides an astounding proportion of women serving
during World War II in the Merchant Marine that have never been
officially recognized as seamen and veterans. This is wrong and it
needs to be corrected. Passing H. R. 1288 would remedy this shameful
situation.
Other research has brought forth two other actions that have
inhibited seamen who served in the Merchant Marine during World War II
from seeking recognition as veterans. The Commandant of the US Coast
Guard's order of 20 Mar 1944 relieved the masters of tugs and seagoing
barges of the responsibility of issuing shipping and discharge papers
to seamen. Then, the US Maritime Administration issued orders to
destroy ship's deck and engine logbooks in the 1970s. A US Coast Guard
Reference Information Paper #77 dated April, 1990 refers to these
actions.
World War II brought about the advent of women in the military and
they proved themselves. They earned some of our country's highest
honors for their service. However, the women who served in the US
Merchant Marine in World War II were denied their Official Mariner's
credentials and have never been able to achieve what they most
gallantly earned, veteran status. Those of us who hold this status
perceive it as one of our most honored possessions.
On 21 March, 2013, US Representatives G. K. Butterfield, Walter
Jones, Mike McIntyre & Mark Meadows of North Carolina and 37 other
Representatives introduced a bill in the House of Representatives that
may help these coastwise seamen and women gain what has been denied
them for more than 67 Years. H.R. 1288, the World War II Merchant
Mariner Service Act would direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to
allow other forms of documentation to prove service in the World War II
Merchant Marine. Official Records have either been withheld, destroyed,
or denied, thus preventing somewhere between 10,000 to 30,000 coastwise
merchant seamen from gaining their rightful place as veterans of our
country.
I offer the following items in support of H. R. 1288, and to
demonstrate the need for this legislation:
RATIONALE FOR HR 1288 ``WW II MERCHANT MARINERS SERVICE ACT''
Findings 1: The US Merchant Marine Seamen of WW II gained veteran
status under a court ruling via Schmacher, Willner, et al, V. Secretary
of the Air Force Edward C. Aldridge, Jr 665 F Supp 41 (D.D.C 1987)
providing they meet certain eligibility requirements.
Findings 2: USCG Information Sheet #77 (April 1992) identifies
acceptable forms of documentation for eligibility meeting the
requirements pursuant to Schmacher V. Aldridge, 655 41(D.D.C 1987)
a. Certificate of Discharge (Form 718A)
b. Continuous Discharge Books (ship's deck/engine logbooks)
c. Company letters showing vessel names and dates of voyages
Findings 3: Some 10,000 to 30,000 coastwise seagoing tug and barge
merchant seamen have been or may be denied recognition upon application
because actions taken by government agencies (prior to P. L. 95-202)
have removed required eligibility records from being available to the
veteran.
Findings 4: Commandant USCG Order of 20 March, 1944 relieves
masters of tugs, towboats and seagoing barges of the responsibility of
submitting reports of seamen shipped or discharged on forms 718A. This
action removes item (a) from the eligibility list in Findings 2.
Findings 5: USCG Information Sheet # 77 (April, 1992) further
states ``Deck logs were traditionally considered to be the property of
the owners of the ships. After World War II, however, the deck and
engine logbooks of vessels operated by the War Shipping Administration
were turned over to that agency by the ship owners, and were destroyed
during the 1970s''. This action effectively eliminates item (b) from
the eligibility list in Findings 2.
Findings 6: Company letters showing vessel names and dates of
voyages are highly suspect of ever existing due to the strict orders
prohibiting even the discussion of ship/troop movement. Then consider
item (c) of Findings 2 should be removed from the eligibility list.
USCG Info Sheet # 77, page 2 refers
Findings 7: Commandant, USCG Ltr 5739 of 09 Apr 2010 states, ``The
US Government did not issue mariner credentials to females during the
World War II.'' And ``The NMC now processes requests for DD 214s as a
part of their normal business practices. This removes cost to prepare
documents for veteran leaving no costs required.
Findings 8: CBO preliminary cost report of 10 June, 2013: ``The
costs associated with the attached bill language have an insignificant
effect on direct spending over the 2014 to 2023 period''. They are
considered De Minimis.
Findings 9: Excerpts from Pres. Roosevelt's fireside Chat 23: On
the Home Front (Oct. 12, 1942): ``In order to keep stepping up our
production, we have had to add millions of workers to the total labor
force of the Nation. In order to do this, we shall be compelled to use
older men, and handicapped people, and more women, and even grown boys
and girls, wherever possible and reasonable, to replace men of military
age and fitness; to use their summer vacations, to work somewhere in
the war industries.''
Findings 10: After the Revolutionary War many Acts of Congress were
enacted to provide pensions to those veterans applying for support.
Thousands of servicemen were without documented service and remained
without any viable means to prove service. Excerpts from documents
retained at the NARA provide: Generally the process required an
applicant to appear before a court of record in the State of his or her
residence to describe under oath the service for which a pension was
claimed. This sets precedence for using certified oaths in conjunction
with the Social Security documents as alternative documentation.
Findings 11: The USCG cannot provide a true estimate of Merchant
Mariners serving in World War II. GAO/HEHS-97-196R refers. Estimates
range from 250,000 to 410,000 from recognized historians. None of these
historians were aware of these 10,000 to 30,000 coastwise merchant
seamen where many served without proper credentials and did not include
them in their above estimates... Some were elderly handicapped; others
women and some were school children who served in a billet, drew wages
and paid taxes. They served on the same vessels in the same hostile war
zones and performed the same services alongside others who were
documented. Yet, only about 90,000 merchant mariners have been
recognized as veterans with just 1192 of these veterans are in receipt
of compensation or pension benefits. This is a vast disparity in ratio
of the other service branches.
Findings 12: DOD and NARA Agreement N1-330-04-1 of Jul, 08, 2004
puts in place a procedure to transfer military personnel files of
individuals from all services, (including civilian personnel or
contractual groups who were later accorder military status under the
provisions of Public Law 95-202). This agreement affects military
personnel records of individuals 62 years after separation from
service. Action has taken place for all except the US Merchant Marine
IAW P.L 95-202. This inaction by the Department of Homeland Security
via (COMDT USCG) has caused many of the mariners to have gone
unrecognized for their services. Many have passed without ever gaining
recognition or benefits and soon all will be History. Only about 90,000
out of 250,000 have ever received recognition as veterans with many
unable to gain access because of age and health condition requiring
assistance for others outside family. Had compliance taken place, these
records would be available to all and providing the mariner a chance to
being recognized many years ago and enjoying the benefits awarded to
them via public law.
Whereas: (1) by court order, Schumacher v. Aldridge 665 F Supp 41
(D.D.C. 1987) provided for veteran status to certain US Merchant Marine
seamen during WW II (07 December, 1941 to 31 December, 1946) with the
same benefits accorded all veterans as administrated by the VA.
Whereas: (2) President Roosevelt's speech of 12 Oct, 1942 puts in
place the use of elderly and handicapped individuals, school children
and women in an effort to support war efforts by replacing men of
military age and fitness, and in stepping up our production of war
materials for those on the front lines.
Whereas: (3) DOD & NARA Agreement N1-330-04-1 of July 08, 2004
provides for the transfer of military records to the National Personnel
Records Center, St. Louis, MO for use as archival records, open to the
public. But no action has taken place by the DHS for the mariner in
almost 9 years causing the veteran loss of due access of his records
that may accord him recognition as a veteran.
Whereas: (4) HR 1288 provides for alternative records to be used in
place of records lost, destroyed or denied for coastwise seamen
affected and allow women and school children be recognized for their
services rendered for the first time ever.
Whereas: (5) Costs for HR 1288 is considered De Minimis via
Findings 8 removing cost as a consideration.
Together we can make a difference as these brave seamen did for us
during WW II. They stood up for us and in doing so they kept this
country free. The very least we can do is repay them with the
recognition they have most graciously deserve. Let's stand up for them
and make it possible for them to gain their rightful position as
veterans. Will you help make it happen?
The reason I am interested in gaining recognition for the men and
women who manned the barges during WWII is that I was one of them and I
know we are deserving and have been overlooked after giving so much for
the war effort and Freedom. The tugboat Menomonee was sunk off the
coast of Virginia on 31 Mar., 1942 at 37' 34'' N, 75'' 25'' by the
German U-boat 754, with the loss of my brother, William Lee Horton, Jr.
at the age of 17, while serving his country.
Below is a summary of my family's approximate time is service
during WW II. Many families had as much service as we did but I have
been unable to document them to the extent of my own family from
firsthand experience:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Sadie Owney Horton was denied seaman papers in New York
City, NY by the Maritime Commission Office when she filed for seaman's
papers in 1942. They informed her that they were not accepting women in
the Merchant Marines at that time. This was their policy. They issued
her a formal USCG identification, depicted above, and were directed to
use that for work.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Note: Trips usually originated in Hampton Roads, VA loading a cargo
of war materials, (ore, scrap metals, sugar, salt, lumber, coal, etc.).
Destination of these barges pointed north. Ports visited, to off load
the cargo, were many with the nearest to Hampton Roads, VA being
Philadelphia, PA and reaching as far north as Nova Scotia. These ports
included Detroit, MI; Stamford, CT; Bridgeport, CT; Hartford, CT; New
Haven, CT; New London, CT; Providence, RI; New Bedford, MA; Fall River
MA; Boston, MA, Portland, ME; Halifax, Nova Scotia and others. There
were 786 trips made that should have resulted in 786 discharges.
Consider: Days at sea were days spent in the presence and fear of
enemy submarines continuously. Waters off the US East Coast were a war
zone 24/7 and merchant ships were constantly being attacked by German
submarine Wolf packs. These tows moved at a pace of 2 to 6 knots and
were sitting ducks for the taking. Threat of being attacked by the
enemy submarines was constant. Captain W. L. Horton spent the
equivalent of 3 years on these treacherous sub infested waters. Sadie
Owney Horton spent about 2 years. The siblings together spent about 2.7
years in this Atlantic host also. This was a significant courageous
wartime undertaking for any family and recognition for their
magnificent and heroic services and the sacrifices they made for our
country should be noted. Collectively, the Horton family spent 12.9
years in US Merchant Marine during WWII with over 8 years traveling
those waters heavily infested with those hostile German submarine wolf
packs that spread havoc on the US Merchant vessels. There were few
military units that endured more than this length of time in any war
zone, ever.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Additional Barges one or more of the Horton family served on
before, during and after WWII
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
HR 1288 could help some gain recognition as a veteran. This
legislation can correct a travesty that has gone unnoticed or ignored
for such a long time. Costs associated with this bill have been deemed
to have an insignificant impact on direct spending by the CBO so cost
should not be an issue. This bill stands alone in helping these
coastwise merchant seamen gain recognition that they have been deprived
of due to records being withheld, destroyed, or denied. This needs to
be corrected and soon. These seamen are leaving us at an alarming rate.
If not now it will all be for history. We need to stand up and do what
is right for these seamen. We must do what is right and support this
bill.
Thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to provide you some
history and reasoning as to why H. R. 1288 is needed. I hope you now
understand what this small group did to assist this nation when all
were needed to keep us free from the enemy during a very bleak time for
our country. They did what was right for our country and now we need to
do what is right for these seamen.
Very Respectfully,
J. Don Horton, Veteran
WW II & Korean War
US Merchant Marine & USCG