Bill Overview
Title: Student Veteran Work Study Modernization Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to implement a five-year pilot program to expand eligibility for the work-study allowance program to individuals who are pursuing programs of rehabilitation, education, or training at a rate equal to at least half of that required of a full-time student. To offset the cost of the program, the bill extends from January 14, 2031, to January 23, 2031, the end of the period for certain VA housing loan fee rates under the VA home loan program.
Sponsors: Rep. Axne, Cynthia [D-IA-3]
Target Audience
Population: Student veterans
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill targets student veterans who are eligible for the VA's work-study allowance program.
- It expands the VA work-study program to include those studying at least half-time in rehabilitation, education, or training programs.
- According to the VA, there were approximately 2 million student veterans in the U.S. in 2020.
- Since the bill focuses on those studying at least half-time, a considerable portion of these student veterans could be impacted.
- The bill includes veterans involved not only in traditional education but also in rehabilitation and training programs.
Reasoning
- The policy is designed to support student veterans, a population with considerable challenges in balancing educational pursuits with other responsibilities.
- There is a financial constraint which means only a fraction of the eligible 2 million student veterans can be covered each year.
- Given the policy targets those studying at least half-time in education, rehabilitation, or training, the impact may vary based on individual circumstances and existing financial stability.
- We'll include voices from different subsets such as full-time students unaffected by the policy, part-time students likely to benefit immensely, and those in vocational training programs.
- Cost considerations imply that highly common profiles (e.g., fully online students with minimal on-campus presence) might experience less impact.
Simulated Interviews
student (California)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy provides a financial cushion allowing me to focus on my studies rather than taking on additional work.
- It's a decent start, but the work-study program should better align with modern education setups like online courses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
rehabilitation program participant (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a positive change because many like me need to juggle training and odd jobs to make ends meet.
- It should include more non-traditional training settings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
student (New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't affect me directly since I am a full-time student and already have educational benefits.
- It's great for part-time students who need extra help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
part-time instructor (Ohio)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It will allow me to take fewer shifts, focusing more on my courses and family.
- I worry about long-term sustainability once the program ends.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
student (Florida)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's helpful, but online students receive less support due to limited campus involvement.
- Hopefully, this encourages more veterans to pursue education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
vocational training participant (Illinois)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional income from work-study can reduce financial stress.
- There are challenges in balancing practical training hours with work-study commitments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
student (Arizona)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I will be able to allocate more time to my studies and perhaps even reduce work hours.
- The program's focus on half-time students aligns well with my needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
student (Georgia)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could ease the financial burden as I transition into education.
- I think it should prioritize newer veterans who have a longer path ahead.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
student (Virginia)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Financial stress reduction will be a huge relief.
- It's difficult balancing time between work, study, and family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
vocational training participant (Washington)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The program will ensure I don't have to work two jobs during my training.
- It's an opportunity to upskill without compromising my financial stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill's five-year pilot will not directly capture the deferred revenue benefits from extending loan fee rates, as these are long-term but create upfront costs.
- Administrative complexity and compliance monitoring could increase the actual running costs of the program.
- Potential need for policy adjustments if participation exceeds estimates or if unintended consequences are observed.
- Dependent on interest rates and housing market conditions, changes in VA loan activity could indirectly affect savings estimates.