Bill Overview
Title: Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act
Description: This bill updates policies and procedures related to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care and benefits for veterans who have been exposed to toxic substances. Specifically, the bill extends the eligibility period for VA hospital care, medical services, and nursing home care for combat veterans who served after September 11, 2001, and were exposed to toxic substances, radiation, or other conditions, including those who did not enroll to receive VA care during the eligibility period. The VA must incorporate into its existing health care screening a screening to help determine potential exposures to toxic substances during military service. Among other requirements, the VA must also provide annual training to health care and benefits personnel with respect to veterans who were exposed to toxic substances; analyze total and respiratory disease mortality in veterans who served in specified locations on specified dates; conduct an epidemiological study on the health trends of veterans who served in the Armed Forces after September 11, 2001; conduct a study to determine trends in the rates of the incidence of cancer in veterans; publish a list of VA resources for veterans who were exposed to toxic substances, families and caregivers of such veterans, and survivors of such veterans who are receiving death benefits; and report on the data quality of the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record and its usefulness in supporting veterans in receiving VA health care and benefits.
Sponsors: Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT]
Target Audience
Population: Veterans exposed to toxic substances during military service
Estimated Size: 3500000
- The bill targets veterans who were exposed to toxic substances during their military service, specifically those who served after September 11, 2001.
- It extends the eligibility period for VA benefits for those veterans, thus impacting anyone who served in combat zones where burn pits were utilized.
- The bill includes provisions for improving health screening and training personnel, which indicates an impact on healthcare providers within the VA system.
- The training and studies mandated by the bill suggest a long-term impact on veterans' health management policies.
Reasoning
- The policy is primarily targeted towards veterans who served post-9/11 and were exposed to burn pits. This is a specific but sizeable group within the veteran population, and the policy has specific provisions for health screenings and benefits that would directly impact them.
- There is a need to consider both veterans who are directly affected by burn pit exposure as well as those within the VA system who manage their care, which includes healthcare workers and administrative staff.
- Not all members of the veteran community will experience the same level of impact from this policy, as it addresses a specific subset of veterans.
- Budgetary constraints and the intended reach of the policy will limit its full impact spectrum to veterans within the specified service and exposure criteria.
- The extension of eligibility and healthcare adjustments are designed to improve well-being significantly over time, but the effects in the initial years may vary based on how quickly the system adjusts.
Simulated Interviews
Healthcare worker at a VA hospital (Austin, Texas)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems like a great progressive step to help veterans. I interact with veterans who have been severely affected by burn pits, and many have struggled to get the care they need.
- While this is good news, it also means more workload for us healthcare staff in already stretched hospitals.
- Hopefully, the policy’s training components will make our jobs a bit easier and more effective.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Veteran Affairs Benefits Officer (San Diego, California)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We’ve seen a lot of veterans suffering without recognition or support due to burn pit exposures, and this is a step in the right direction.
- It’s going to be a challenge administratively, but necessary.
- Veterans who couldn't enroll initially might now get the support they need, thanks to this policy.
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 | 8 | 5 |
Veteran exposed to burn pits (Charleston, South Carolina)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- For years, I felt like there was no help coming for us who were exposed.
- This gives me hope. I might finally get some assistance with my health issues.
- I worry about the complexity of accessing these new services though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Retired Navy Veteran (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an overdue recognition of service-related health issues.
- The studies included can help ensure more fair treatments for veterans like me in the future.
- I anticipate clearer resources and assistance for my medical conditions due to toxic exposures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Active military preparing for transition to veteran status (Fort Bragg, North Carolina)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will significantly benefit me as I transition out of active duty.
- I’m concerned it might overlook others who have exposures but different symptoms.
- I hope for comprehensive and swift screening aspects as I move onto VA care.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
VA Mental Health Counselor (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm relieved to see more focus on burn pit exposure since it often correlates with PTSD, complicating cases.
- There will be pressure to integrate this new focus into our mental health plans.
- Beneficial in the long-term but requires adaptable systems to improve patient care quality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Researcher studying veterans' health issues (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 56 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The mandated studies will advance understanding of exposure effects and support data-driven decision-making.
- Necessary funding and resources will be crucial for proper implementation and robust findings.
- I’m eager to contribute to research that influences policy improvements.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Spouse of a veteran affected by burn pits (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m relieved this policy could finally offer my husband the support and care he’s needed.
- As his caregiver, this provides us both hope for improved quality of life and less financial strain.
- It's important that all families like ours are kept informed of new benefits and how to access them.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Veteran with recent VA enrollment (Fayetteville, Arkansas)
Age: 38 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I recently enrolled and am glad to see recognition of those unlisted conditions getting attention.
- There’s a lot of skepticism until we see physical benefits, but this policy could help.
- Hearings and screenings must be frequent to assure veterans of their specific risks post-exposure.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Veteran pursuing higher education (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about how this policy impacts long-term health care as I transition to civilian life.
- It will be beneficial if extra screenings confirm exposure-related conditions early.
- An effective VA system is crucial for my ongoing well-being as I manage education and health.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $525000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $630000000)
Year 3: $551250000 (Low: $441000000, High: $661500000)
Year 5: $605943750 (Low: $484754500, High: $726292500)
Year 10: $738033925 (Low: $590427140, High: $883640710)
Year 100: $1236864804 (Low: $986611844, High: $1484237764)
Key Considerations
- The bill targets a specific group of veterans, meaning its direct effects are limited to this subset.
- The long-term health impact and subsequent costs of toxic exposure are still uncertain.
- Implementation feasibility and timeliness of studies and information dissemination are critical to bill effectiveness.