Bill Overview
Title: Wounded Warrior Bill of Rights Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense to establish a policy (containing specified elements) to ensure accountability for actions taken under the authorities of the Defense Health Agency and the military departments concerning wounded, ill, and injured members of the Armed Forces during the integrated disability evaluation system process. The bill also specifies that each military department must maintain personnel authority over, and responsibility for, its members during medical evaluation board consideration.
Sponsors: Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-18]
Target Audience
Population: Wounded, ill, and injured members of the Armed Forces
Estimated Size: 1100000
- The bill specifically targets wounded, ill, and injured members of the Armed Forces.
- Many current and former members of the Armed Forces eventually face medical evaluation boards.
- The global military has millions of active and former service members, many of whom have been injured in service.
- The bill's implications are for members involved in the integrated disability evaluation system process, which is a subset of the entire military.
Reasoning
- The targeted population for this policy is a specific group within the military: wounded, ill, and injured service members who are going through or may go through the medical evaluation board process.
- The budget constraints mean that the policy needs to judiciously use funds to ensure maximum impact, particularly focusing on accountability and oversight during the integrated disability evaluation process.
- Interviews will include members directly affected by the process, like active service members and veterans, as well as those indirectly affected, such as military family members and advocates.
- There exists a need to capture diversity in the severity of injury and rank, as well as geographical distribution to reflect differing state impacts.
- Current welfare scores will set a baseline, as individuals involved typically experience varied mental and physical health challenges impacting their current self-reported wellbeing.
- Interviews will also consider potential non-impacted populations to provide a baseline understanding of broader perceptions of military healthcare procedures.
Simulated Interviews
Active Duty - Army (North Carolina)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy will make the evaluation process more transparent.
- Most of my peers are frustrated by delays and misconceptions caused by the current system.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Veteran (California)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There have been many inefficiencies in how cases are handled. This policy could alleviate some of these issues.
- I'm concerned about how long changes will take to implement.
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 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Military Advocate (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We've needed reforms in how evaluations are conducted for years, and this policy is a step in the right direction.
- Proper accountability will ensure fewer fall through the cracks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Active Duty - Navy (Virginia)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I'm not directly affected now, I know several people who are, and this policy could be beneficial.
- Maintaining personnel oversight within departments is a good move.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Reservist - Air Force (Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Right now, everything feels uncertain. More accountability would help me and others like me trust the system.
- The policy's budget should ensure quicker processes.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Army Officer (New York)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reforms like these have been long advocated for by military families.
- I'm cautiously optimistic about its long-term effects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Veteran (Washington)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that speeds the disability evaluation system is a benefit to veterans.
- Accountability is key – it's been missing for too long.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Civil Servant - Department of Defense (Illinois)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Implementation of this policy could set a standard across military departments.
- Efficiency and accountability are the main goals.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
National Guard (Nevada)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 19/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy won't affect me directly, but my peers will benefit.
- I see it as a good safety net for those who serve.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Veteran Advocate (Texas)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The need for advocacy in the evaluation process is strong, and this policy could ease some burdens.
- I'm interested in how this policy might change the landscape over the next few years.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $140000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $180000000)
Year 3: $135000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $175000000)
Year 5: $130000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $170000000)
Year 10: $120000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $150000000)
Year 100: $110000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $140000000)
Key Considerations
- The number of affected military personnel, veterans, and reserves involved in the disability evaluation process.
- Potential initial high costs due to administrative restructuring and systems implementation.
- Long-term savings based on improved efficiency and accountability.