Bill Overview
Title: Housing our Veterans Act
Description: This bill requires the Government Accountability Office to report to Congress on the availability of affordable housing for veterans who have or are participating in any program administered by the Homeless Programs Office of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Sponsors: Rep. Gonzalez, Vicente [D-TX-15]
Target Audience
Population: Veterans involved with or benefited from VA Homeless Programs
Estimated Size: 400000
- The bill is focused on veterans who have participated or are participating in programs administered by the Homeless Programs Office of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
- This includes veterans who are either homeless or at risk of becoming homeless.
- The primary group affected by reporting changes specified in the bill are those veterans who engage with VA homeless support services, which are designed to support veterans in need of stable housing.
- The broader group potentially affected could be any veteran interested in the availability of affordable housing resources, as changes based on the report could influence housing policies.
- There are approximately 19 million veterans in the United States.
- Assuming that a certain proportion of these veterans engage with or have been eligible for these services, we scale down from the total veteran population.
- According to data from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the number of veterans experiencing homelessness in a given year is around 40,000. However, a larger number—potentially hundreds of thousands—may interact with relevant programs over time or have housing vulnerabilities.
Reasoning
- The policy is aimed specifically at veterans involved with VA Homeless Programs, focusing on the availability of affordable housing.
- The actual potential impact is on the subset of veterans currently or formerly homeless and participating in these programs, which is a relatively small but significant audience.
- Given the budget constraints, the policy's impact might manifest more in terms of reporting and strategic changes rather than immediate large-scale housing availability improvements.
- Veterans not directly benefiting from such programs might see negligible changes, hence, their Cantril scores would likely remain the same regardless of the policy.
- Understanding that the policy intends to inform future actions, the immediate Cantril scores might not vastly differ unless changes are implemented based on the report.
Simulated Interviews
Veteran Services Coordinator (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the report could lead to more awareness about housing needs, hopefully increasing resources for us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a start, but what we truly need are immediate action and more houses built.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this will address some of the backlog in finding permanent affordable homes for vets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Freelance Artist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this leads to new policies, it could be helpful, but we need support now.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Teacher (Austin, TX)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The report could highlight issues, but it’s execution I’m concerned about.
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 |
IT Specialist (Denver, CO)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m skeptical about how much a report can do without additional funding.
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 |
Mechanic (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any focus on our situation is good, but what we really need is concrete action.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Chef (New York, NY)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a positive step, but I doubt it changes much soon.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Community Volunteer (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reporting is a start to change, but I worry about the follow-through.
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 | 6 | 6 |
College Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic that highlighting the issue might lead to greater policy decisions in the future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $1000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The primary fiscal impact is from the cost of producing the report, which is a single, bounded administrative task.
- The report could set the stage for further legislative action which might entail additional costs or savings based on recommendations.