Bill Overview
Title: A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to repeal the copayment requirement for recipients of Department of Veterans Affairs payments or allowances for beneficiary travel, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill repeals the copayment requirement for individuals who receive Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) payments or allowances for beneficiary travel to or from a VA facility in connection with vocational rehabilitation, required counseling, or for the purpose of examination, treatment, or care.
Sponsors: Sen. Boozman, John [R-AR]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals who receive VA payments or allowances for beneficiary travel
Estimated Size: 11000000
- The bill affects individuals who receive payments or allowances from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
- These individuals are typically veterans seeking treatment, rehabilitation, or counseling services.
- The bill specifically impacts those who require travel to VA facilities for these services, as it repeals the copayment requirement for travel.
Reasoning
- The policy targets around 11 million veterans who receive allowances for travel related to care from the VA. Given the budget constraints, not all veterans will experience a significant change in their wellbeing, as the individuals most impacted will likely be those who frequently travel for services.
- There are likely individuals who are less impacted due to infrequent use of VA travel services or those who have a stable financial situation that makes current copayments manageable. These individuals will experience lower wellbeing improvements.
- The interviews reflect a variety of perspectives, including those who will directly benefit and those who will experience little to no change in their financial burden or wellbeing.
- Commonness scores help estimate how widely the interviewees represent the veteran population in relation to this policy. Higher scores indicate a more common profile that could be impacted by the policy.
- Budget limitations might mean savings on copayments are not life-changing for all, but could greatly improve wellbeing for those on tighter budgets.
Simulated Interviews
Retired Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 68 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would save me a significant amount on travel copayments, which adds up over time.
- I feel more financially secure knowing I don’t have to budget for these expenses.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Part-time Teacher (Boise, ID)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The copayment savings could afford me more flexibility in my monthly budget, reducing financial stress.
- It would mean less financial juggling to afford travel to my rehabilitation sessions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Student (San Diego, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy sounds beneficial for those who travel far, but it doesn’t affect me directly since I live close to a VA and don’t use the travel reimbursement.
- I hope it can help those who need it more.
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 | 6 | 6 |
Veteran Services Coordinator (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will ease the burden on many of my clients who struggle with transportation costs to the VA.
- Personally, I see it as a well-targeted support measure that my clients need.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Buffalo, NY)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Frequent travel for therapy sessions is costly. Removing copayments could allow me to attend more consistently without financial strain.
- This policy would really lower my travel burden.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Nurse (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don’t travel to the VA myself, but I see how this policy could benefit those I volunteer with who do.
- Every little bit helps those living on fixed incomes.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Business Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Travel expenses add up significantly each month. This repeal of copayments would allow me to redirect funds towards my business.
- Feeling less financially burdened would definitely improve my wellbeing.
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 | 6 | 4 |
High School Counselor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though infrequent, eliminating copayments will be helpful. Sometimes it’s juggling expenses that stops me from using transport allowances more often.
- It’s a great support system.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Postman (Nashville, TN)
Age: 74 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I don’t rely on the VA's travel allowance often, I foresee this could significantly reduce costs for those who do.
- It's a positive change for the veteran community.
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 | 6 |
Homemaker (Portland, OR)
Age: 49 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy probably wouldn't change much for us personally as we don’t travel often for VA services.
- For those who use it more, it could mean a lot of financial relief.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $550000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $650000000)
Year 2: $550000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $650000000)
Year 3: $575000000 (Low: $475000000, High: $675000000)
Year 5: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)
Year 10: $675000000 (Low: $575000000, High: $775000000)
Year 100: $1100000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1300000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy improves access to VA facilities for veterans by removing financial barriers associated with travel.
- This may lead to increased usage of VA services, which could improve health outcomes for veterans.
- There could be an increase in administrative load to manage increased reimbursements, although the system is currently equipped to handle reimbursements.