Bill Overview
Title: To establish certain protections for individuals involuntarily separated from the Armed Forces solely on the basis of refusing to receive vaccinations against COVID-19.
Description: This bill requires the reinstatement of individuals who were discharged or dismissed from the Armed Forces solely because they refused to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Specifically, such individuals must be reinstated, at their request, in the same rank and grade they held at the time of their separation from the Armed Forces. The discharge or dismissal of such individuals must be characterized as honorable. Such individuals may not be denied retired or retainer pay or any benefits through the Department of Defense or Department of Veterans Affairs solely on the basis they refused to receive a COVID-19 vaccination.
Sponsors: Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4]
Target Audience
Population: People who were involuntarily separated from the Armed Forces for refusing COVID-19 vaccinations
Estimated Size: 10000
- Individuals who were part of the Armed Forces and were discharged due to non-compliance with COVID-19 vaccination mandates are directly impacted.
- This law affects service members who refused the COVID-19 vaccine on personal or other grounds, leading to their involuntary discharge.
- It potentially impacts the families and dependents of these service members who may be affected by changes in benefits and service member status.
- The bill seeks to retroactively alter the status and benefits accorded to these individuals by reinstating them and ensuring they are recognized honorably.
- The precise number of individuals impacted depends on the number of service members separated solely for refusing COVID-19 vaccinations.
Reasoning
- Most of the people impacted are former military personnel, residing in various parts of the United States. Their age range is likely quite diverse, given the different stages of career interruption due to the policy. Common factors across these individuals include having served in the military and facing repercussions for refusing vaccination.
- The policy primarily offers career restoration and benefit reinstatements rather than immediate financial compensation, aligning with the provided budget constraints over time.
- Given the estimated targeted group of 10,000 individuals, a moderate impact on well-being is expected due to reinstatement of career and benefits, contributing to better mental and financial health outcomes.
Simulated Interviews
Former Army Specialist (Fort Bragg, NC)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel that being discharged over this was unfair, but I'm optimistic about being reinstated.
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 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Former Navy Officer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope to return to serve my country and restore my career path.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Unemployed (Austin, TX)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The inability to continue my military career has been challenging. Reinstatement would improve my circumstances significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Private Contractor (Fayetteville, NC)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am content with my current path, but I welcome the opportunity to return and gain benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Veteran Advocate (Colorado Springs, CO)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a positive step toward acknowledging veterans' concerns and restoring their dignity.
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 | 7 | 6 |
Mechanic (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've moved on, but retrieval of benefits is appealing. I don't seek active reinstatement.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Stay-at-home parent (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen first-hand the impact on my partner, and reinstatement would stabilize our family life.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Software developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've transitioned successfully. While benefits are an advantage, I'm indifferent towards re-enlistment.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Former Navy Petty Officer (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reinstatement would relieve financial stress and allow me to pursue my career in the navy again.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Freelance Writer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm at a crossroads, and this offer of reinstatement is a welcome one.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Year 3: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Year 5: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Year 10: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Year 100: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Key Considerations
- The administrative burden of processing reinstatements and changes of discharge status.
- The health implications related to COVID-19 and ongoing vaccination policies within the military.
- Variation in costs depending on the actual number of individuals seeking reinstatement.
- Potential legal and institutional challenges regarding policy execution.