Bill Overview
Title: Restore Veterans’ Compensation Act of 2022
Description: This bill eliminates the recoupment of separation pay, special separation benefits, and voluntary separation incentive payments from members of the Armed Forces who subsequently receive disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition, the bill limits recoupment of such pay from service members who subsequently receive military retired or retainer pay.
Sponsors: Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7]
Target Audience
Population: Veterans receiving both separation payments and disability or retirement pay
Estimated Size: 4700000
- The bill concerns members of the Armed Forces who receive separation pay, special separation benefits, or voluntary separation incentive payments and who also receive other forms of compensation such as disability compensation or retired pay.
- The target population would primarily be veterans of the United States military, as it deals specifically with the Department of Veterans Affairs and military benefits.
- According to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, there are currently about 18 million veterans in the United States.
- Not all veterans would be receiving both separation payments and subsequent VA disability compensation or retired pay, so the affected group would be significantly smaller than the total veteran population.
- Of the 18 million U.S. veterans, about 4.7 million receive disability compensation from the VA, which overlaps with the population that could be impacted by the bill.
Reasoning
- The target population is fairly specific, comprising veterans who receive both separation payments and disability or retirement pay, estimated to be significantly fewer than the full veteran population.
- The policy budget constraints mean we cannot cover every eligible veteran, so we need to focus on a subset who might face the most significant financial impact without the policy.
- Considering the budget implications, the policy implementation will likely prioritize higher costs incurred from recoupment in retrospective payments being made to veterans.
Simulated Interviews
retired military (Texas)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would significantly lift the financial burden that's been weighing me down.
- I've struggled to balance post-service life with financial worries about recoupments.
- Ending the recoupment would help justify my disability payments and retirement pay more convincingly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
IT Consultant, Former Navy Officer (California)
Age: 51 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing I wouldn't have to return funds would greatly stabilize my financial situation.
- The policy would remove the stress of potentially being in debt to the VA.
- I can better plan for my retirement without surprise withdrawals from my pension.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
retired, former Marine Corps (Florida)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don’t have to worry about losing a part of my fixed income.
- This approach feels like finally they are acknowledging our sacrifices.
- It adds a bit more dignity to how we’re treated after service.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Administrative Assistant, former Air Force personnel (Virginia)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I won’t miss payments, but I know others who would benefit a lot.
- The policy wouldn't change much for me at this moment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Veteran Advocate, former Army (Colorado)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm currently not directly affected, but this would be crucial for many peers.
- It's a fair move to protect those who need it most.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Freelancer, former Coast Guard (Ohio)
Age: 47 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Eliminating recoupment will help me immensely in managing my finances.
- This policy recognizes the effort I put back into civilian life.
- Retirement pay should not be tied down by procedural overheads like these.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
retired logistician, former National Guard (Nevada)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This would remove a huge financial burden that's been ongoing.
- It would allow better planning for medical expenses without surprise charges.
- Feeling respected and cared for after service matters beyond just money.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Federal employee, former Army (North Carolina)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am stable now, but knowing I don't have to pay back separation would be relieving.
- This could ultimately help many others like me in the long term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
teacher, former Army Reserve (Illinois)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not having funds recouped would mean so much, especially medically.
- This allows a greater peace of mind overall with pensions intact.
- Personal rehabilitation always felt financially constrained. This would lift a lot of personal restrictions.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
retired, former Air Force (Arizona)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is essential as it ensures a secure flow of my benefits.
- Recoupment has been incredibly stressful and financially concerning.
- It aligns with what should be basic post-service care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $510000000 (Low: $410000000, High: $610000000)
Year 3: $520000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $620000000)
Year 5: $540000000 (Low: $440000000, High: $650000000)
Year 10: $580000000 (Low: $470000000, High: $700000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $12000000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill affects a specific group: veterans receiving certain types of military separation payments and subsequently additional compensation.
- Potentially unclaimed benefits in the initial rollout might diminish initial cost impact estimates.
- Coordination between the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs will be crucial for smooth policy implementation.