Bill Overview
Title: Faster Payments to Veterans’ Survivors Act of 2022
Description: This bill modifies policies and procedures related to the payment of benefits under certain life insurance programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). If a primary beneficiary has not made a claim for payment within one year (currently two years) after the death of the insured under the National Service Life Insurance (NSLI) program or the United States Government Life Insurance (USGLI) program, the VA is authorized to make payment to another designated beneficiary as if the primary beneficiary had predeceased the insured. If no designated beneficiary makes a claim within two years (currently four years) after the death of the insured, the VA is authorized to make a payment to a person the VA deems to be equitably entitled to such benefit. The bill also modifies the beneficiary designation process under NSLI and USGLI. Specifically, if a person does not designate a beneficiary for insurance, or if the designated beneficiary predeceases the insured person, the VA must determine the beneficiary in a specified order of succession. Additionally, the bill requires the VA to improve its processes and procedures with respect to identifying, locating, and disbursing undisbursed life insurance benefits to hard-to-find beneficiaries, including by improving its website search tools.
Sponsors: Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH]
Target Audience
Population: Families and beneficiaries of deceased military veterans
Estimated Size: 18000000
- The bill changes the timeline for claims under the NSLI and USGLI programs, which impacts the families of deceased veterans.
- Adjustments to the claims process for beneficiaries could affect any beneficiaries of veterans who had life insurance policies under these programs.
- The bill aims to facilitate faster payout of insurance benefits, thus affecting families who depend on these payouts for financial support.
- Clarification on beneficiary designation may impact the succession of payments in case no beneficiary or deceased beneficiary is present.
- Roughly 18 million veterans reside in the US, suggesting a significant number potentially held such insurance policies.
Reasoning
- The Faster Payments to Veterans' Survivors Act of 2022 affects families who are beneficiaries under the NSLI and USGLI programs. These families vary widely in socio-economic standing and depend on insurance benefits to differing extents.
- The policy performs best in facilitating faster payouts to claimants who have been delayed in receiving their benefits due to prior administrative timelines.
- These families' Cantril wellbeing scores should reflect both the general impact of quicker financial support and the lasting changes from simplified procedures to access these benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Retired (Austin, TX)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The faster payment rule is beneficial. I've been waiting for two years for an administration decision. Speedier procedures would have alleviated a lot of stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Factory Worker (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It might help people like me get their claim processed quicker. It was frustrating being told to wait after I submitted everything on time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
School Teacher (San Diego, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Clarifying the beneficiary succession will help with resolving stale claims. My mom dealt with such issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Software Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not directly affected, but I support making processes more efficient. It seems like a logical step forward.
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 |
Nurse (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Quicker payments matter crucially, especially when unexpected losses occur. Also, the new rules for blank beneficiary designations can prevent unwanted delay.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Mechanic (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Many families like mine are unaware of such benefits or the process, so I feel the new online tools could be really useful.
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 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While my immediate family wasn't affected, friends' experiences with delayed claims echo the necessity for this policy.
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 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Retired Police Officer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 75 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bureaucracy should improve and lowering wait times could aid in alleviating financial strain on families that depend on these benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Chef (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think improving access to resources is always a positive change. This wasn't on my radar, but seems important for many.
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 |
Entrepreneur (Denver, CO)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even though I won't be directly impacted, the policy could reduce future legal disputes about funds which can be costly.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $4500000 (Low: $2500000, High: $6500000)
Year 3: $4200000 (Low: $2200000, High: $6200000)
Year 5: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $6000000)
Year 10: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $6000000)
Year 100: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $6000000)
Key Considerations
- The relatively small size of the veteran life insurance programs might limit the discretion in cost management.
- The reform aims to decrease the time for beneficiaries to receive payments, which could improve financial outcomes for dependent families.