Bill Overview
Title: Elimination of the VA Asset and Infrastructure Review (AIR) Commission Act of 2022
Description: This bill repeals the VA Asset and Infrastructure Review Act of 2018, which established the independent Asset and Infrastructure Review Commission and prescribes directives related to the development and assessment of recommendations for modernizing or realigning Veterans Health Administration facilities.
Sponsors: Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2]
Target Audience
Population: Veterans who utilize VHA services
Estimated Size: 19000000
- The bill in question concerns the elimination of an effort to modernize or realign Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities.
- The population most directly impacted by changes to the VHA facilities are veterans who utilize these healthcare services.
- There are approximately 19 million veterans in the United States. Not all veterans use VHA facilities, but they form the core group impacted.
- Other individuals employed by the VHA or involved in services related to veterans' healthcare will also be indirectly impacted.
- Family members of veterans who depend on VHA facilities for health services will feel the secondary effects of this legislation.
- Decisions regarding the infrastructure of VHA facilities could affect the accessibility and quality of care provided to veterans.
Reasoning
- The elimination of the VA Asset and Infrastructure Review (AIR) Commission Act of 2022 could impact veterans who utilize VHA services most directly by affecting the modernization of facilities, which can influence both their accessibility and quality of healthcare.
- Approximately 19 million veterans could be affected by this legislative change, but not all veterans use VHA services, narrowing the directly impacted population.
- VA employees and those indirectly linked to veterans’ health services might experience changes, but their impacts will likely be secondary.
- Given the budget constraints, the policy would need to significantly prioritize immediate impacts on facility quality and veteran care.
- The cost mandate does not allow for extensive facility overhaul but can maintain and possibly optimize current service levels temporarily.
Simulated Interviews
Retired Army Veteran (Houston, TX)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on VHA services for all my healthcare needs, and I've heard talks about potential closures or realignment making it more difficult to access care.
- The repeal sounds like they want to keep everything as it is, without making needed improvements. I understand that change costs money, but we deserve updated facilities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Veteran Transition Counselor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My job involves helping veterans access mental health services, already a challenging scenario.
- Without a push for modernization, we might continue to see outdated facilities and strained resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 1 |
VHA Administrative Staff (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Operational challenges are never-ending, and without investments in infrastructure and technology, it'll be hard to improve things.
- I worry that staying stagnant might hurt us more in the long run compared to the push for improving our systems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Retired Veteran's Widow (Miami, FL)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a retired military spouse, I appreciate the security VHA systems offer, but I've seen the toll of outdated facilities.
- Keeping the current facilities feels safe, but also a missed opportunity to offer even better care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Veteran and Student (Portland, OR)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I'm focused on my studies, every time I need VHA services, I'm reminded of how outdated the system is.
- Eliminating improvements might not affect my day-to-day but could impact attitudes towards long-term care innovations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Registered Nurse at VHA (Nashville, TN)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need modernization more than ever before. There's only so much that can be done with outdated equipment.
- Repealing this act just feels like a short-term relief on budget, but not on operational efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 1 |
VA Service Technician (Denver, CO)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The potential to modernize VHA tools and technology could streamline maintenance work significantly.
- I'm split; static budgets ease stress today, but we aren't building for tomorrow.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Advocate for Veteran Services Reform (Seattle, WA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The repeal of the commission act feels like a step backward against years of advocacy.
- Our veterans deserve the best, yet without facility improvements, the best remains distant.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Public Policy Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- From a policy perspective, repealing the act limits our capacity for significant improvements in veterans' health infrastructure.
- I'll be monitoring how this impacts service delivery and public opinion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
VA Volunteer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 9.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Volunteering in often crowded and underperforming facilities is taxing, especially without clear improvements from modernization.
- Lessening reforms adds a layer of challenge for those of us striving to help any way we can.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 1 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
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
- Future infrastructure improvements or modernizations planned by the commission may not occur.
- Potential reluctance or delay in critical VA facility enhancements where needed.
- The decision impacts ongoing contracts with consultants, analysts, and third-party evaluators associated with the commission's tasks.
- Immediate budget reallocation potential follows the commission's removal, allowing resources to be available for alternate VA uses.