Bill Overview
Title: To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that a member of the Armed Forces, granted a general discharge under honorable conditions on the sole basis that such member failed to obey a lawful order to receive a vaccine for COVID-19, is eligible for certain educational assistance administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Description: This bill ensures that members of the Armed Forces who were granted a general discharge under honorable conditions (on the sole basis that the members failed to obey a lawful order to receive a vaccine for COVID-19) are eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill-Active Duty and Post-9/11 GI Bill programs.
Sponsors: Rep. Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5]
Target Audience
Population: Former members of US Armed Forces discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine
Estimated Size: 8000
- The bill specifically targets members of the Armed Forces who received a general discharge under honorable conditions solely for failing to comply with a COVID-19 vaccination order.
- The legislation is focused on ensuring these service members can receive educational benefits under specific VA programs.
- Only former military members discharged for this specific reason are targeted.
- The global impact will be limited as this specifically affects the US military personnel who have been discharged in this context.
Reasoning
- The bill targets a specific subset of the population – those discharged from the military due to non-compliance with a COVID-19 vaccine order. From the global estimate of 15,000, 8,000 are in the US, posing specific constraints on the population impacted.
- Given the budget constraints, the policy needs to be impactful enough to justify the $80 million in the first year, with a significant improvement in wellbeing scores to support this.
- We need to consider the cost per person of the GI Bill benefits relative to the budget. Some individuals will benefit more than others, dependin on their educational pursuits and current life situations.
- Most impacted individuals would likely be those who had plans for further education using these benefits before discharge.
Simulated Interviews
Former Soldier (Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I was disappointed with my discharge due to the vaccine refusal, but this bill gives me hope to pursue my education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Nurse (California)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It was financially straining to lose my GI benefits. This bill would ease my academic expenses significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Truck Driver (Florida)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I was managing, but the benefits would greatly help towards my new career plans.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Unemployed (Ohio)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change could lift a massive burden and open doors to education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Security Guard (New York)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- GI benefits aren't important to me now. Life remains the same with or without this policy.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Part-time Student (Virginia)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The GI Bill support is crucial. It directly affects my capacity to finish my education.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill doesn't change my life. My military days are behind me.
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 |
Software Developer (Washington)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm eager to advance my career, so reclaiming the GI Bill is significant.
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 |
Consultant (Nevada)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Educational benefits are a game-changer for my ongoing professional development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Bartender (Georgia)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With my benefits restored, I can finally afford to train as a chef.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)
Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)
Year 3: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)
Year 5: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)
Year 10: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)
Year 100: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)
Key Considerations
- The small size of the population affected limits the overall cost.
- Effects are spread over multiple years due to the nature of educational timelines and program uptake.
- The increased educational benefits could lead to broader opportunities for affected veterans in the labor market.