Bill Overview
Title: Veterans First Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits the Department of Veterans Affairs from obligating or expending any amounts to provide emergency assistance in response to an emergency at the southern border directly resulting from the repeal of certain public health orders from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Specifically, the bill prohibits such emergency assistance in response to the repeal of the order issued on August 2, 2021, titled Public Health Reassessment and Order Suspending the Right To Introduce Certain Persons From Countries Where a Quarantinable Communicable Disease Exists ; the order issued on April 1, 2022, titled Public Health Determination and Order Regarding Suspending the Right To Introduce Certain Persons From Countries Where a Quarantinable Communicable Disease Exists ; and an order relating to the same public health concerns as the listed orders.
Sponsors: Rep. Womack, Steve [R-AR-3]
Target Audience
Population: Veterans
Estimated Size: 19000000
- The bill primarily impacts the operations of the Department of Veterans Affairs by restricting their capacity to provide emergency assistance in specific situations.
- It indirectly impacts veterans by altering how the Department of Veterans Affairs can allocate resources during certain emergencies.
- The bill is a response to immigration-related public health orders and addresses resources potentially being diverted from veterans' services to immigration emergencies.
- The repeal of public health orders relates to the processing of certain persons at the border, which may increase demand on resources at the border.
- The veteran community in the U.S. is approximately 19 million individuals.
Reasoning
- The Veterans First Act of 2022 mainly impacts veterans by ensuring that the Department of Veterans Affairs' resources are not diverted to emergencies at the southern border, thus safeguarding resources for veteran services.
- Though the direct impact might be limited to how resources are allocated rather than impacting all veterans' personal lives, it may indirectly affect those reliant on VA services for critical support.
- The policy reflects a prioritization of veterans in resource allocation, which could be viewed favorably by the veteran community.
- Combining the limited budget with a national priority like this means the effect is overall modest but seen positively by those who value VA services highly.
- Given the large vet population, individuals outside veteran services are unlikely to see any impact, hence being represented as 'none' in impact.
Simulated Interviews
retired veteran (Texas)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's important that our resources are used to support veterans first. This policy makes sure the VA stays focused on us, the people it was meant to serve.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
active duty transitioning to civilian (California)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this means I'll get better support when I transition out. It seems like a good idea to ensure VA funds are not stretched thin.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
nurse (New York)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a nurse at a VA hospital, I support anything that helps us deliver better care. This seems aimed at ensuring veterans get top priority, which I agree with.
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 |
student (Miami)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see this affecting me much since my needs are covered by the GI Bill, but it's good to know resources won’t be unnecessarily stretched.
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 |
homemaker (Arizona)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There’s been a lot of discussion about resources at the border. While we’re near it, I think ensuring the VA has what it needs for veterans is crucial.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
retired nurse (Florida)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I volunteer with many vets, and I've seen resources stretched thin. Any act that means more guaranteed support for them is a good step.
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 |
civil engineer (Nevada)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It seems like a solid choice, especially if it keeps the VA focused on veteran-related issues instead of getting caught up in border policy issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
teacher (Missouri)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I just want assurance that my husband gets the care he needs without hindrance. Keeping VA funds for veterans seems fair.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
student (Virginia)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm still using VA education benefits, but near the completion of my studies. This policy shouldn't affect me directly.
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 (Colorado)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring VA resources go to veterans' needs first is a priority. Hopefully, this policy limits the diversion of funds away from our care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000 (Low: $100000, 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
- This legislation's primary effect lies in the redirected focus of the VA's spending priorities.
- It establishes boundaries for the existing roles and responsibilities of the VA in non-veteran emergencies resulting from border policy changes.