Bill Overview
Title: Service Restoration Act
Description: This bill prohibits the use of federal funds to require a member of the Armed Forces to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. The bill also prohibits adverse action (e.g., punishment) being taken against a member of the Armed Forces solely on the basis that the member refuses to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Individuals who were involuntarily separated from the Armed Forces solely on the basis of their refusal to receive a COVID-19 vaccination must be reinstated in the grade they held prior to the separation. In computing retired or retainer pay, the military department concerned must include the time between the involuntary separation and reinstatement of the individual. The military department concerned must expunge adverse actions or references to involuntary separation related to the refusal to receive a COVID-19 vaccination from an individual's service record.
Sponsors: Rep. Roy, Chip [R-TX-21]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the Armed Forces worldwide impacted by COVID-19 vaccination policies
Estimated Size: 2200000
- The bill affects members of the Armed Forces who have been or could be required to receive a COVID-19 vaccination using federal funds.
- It concerns service members who have faced adverse actions due to their refusal to get vaccinated.
- The bill additionally impacts those members who had been involuntarily separated from the Armed Forces for not getting vaccinated and provides for their reinstatement.
- The military department's handling of records relating to vaccine refusal will be altered, affecting record-keeping processes.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts a specific subset of the U.S. population: current and former members of the Armed Forces who were directly affected by the COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
- Budget constraints require targeting the policy effectively to those who experienced adverse actions or separations, aiming to reverse these adversities.
- Not all service members will be affected by this policy, as it only pertains to those who refused the vaccine and faced consequences as a result.
- Consider the distribution of service members across different likelihoods of impact, from high (those separated and wishing to return) to none (those who complied or faced no action).
Simulated Interviews
Infantryman (Fort Bragg, NC)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I felt unjustly punished for my personal medical choice.
- Reinstating my position would greatly improve my career prospects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Navy Officer (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I complied, I felt uneasy about the mandate.
- Happy to see colleagues get a chance to return, but it doesn't change my situation.
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 |
Veteran (San Diego, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reinstatement would help, but I've started a new life as a civilian now.
- I'm skeptical but somewhat hopeful this policy passes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Air Force Pilot (Colorado Springs, CO)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's reassuring for those separated, but it makes me question initial mandates.
- Doesn't impact me directly, but hope it resolves tensions in troops.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Army National Guard (Fort Hood, TX)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy change validates my decision not to vaccinate.
- It doesn't change much personally since I wasn’t severely affected.
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 |
Navy Reserve (Pensacola, FL)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might return to service, depending on circumstances.
- Happy the policy recognizes unjust actions but still unsure about my future.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Defense) (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy offers rectification for those adversely affected.
- Interested in broader implications for military health policy.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Alaska National Guard (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's an opportunity for reinstatement, albeit one I'm cautiously optimistic about.
- The policy gives hope to those who faced harsh penalties.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Air Force (Arlington, VA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wasn't affected by these mandates, but policy shifts are intriguing.
- Policy shows an evolving approach to mandates in military.
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 |
Air Force Medic (San Antonio, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Glad to see the policy but concerned about potential future mandates.
- Relieved to see a more considerate approach to health policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $100000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $130000000)
Year 3: $100000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $130000000)
Year 5: $100000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $130000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)
Key Considerations
- The Department of Defense will need to carefully manage the logistics of reinstating military personnel and updating records.
- Monitoring public health outcomes related to COVID-19 within the unvaccinated population may be necessary to assess any long-term impact on healthcare costs.