Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5274

Bill Overview

Title: A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to reinstate criminal penalties for persons charging veterans unauthorized fees relating to claims for benefits under the laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill limits attorneys' fees for claims involving individuals who were exposed to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina between August 1, 1953, and December 31, 1987. Further, the bill requires an attorney representing an individual for such a claim to disburse the funds of any judgment or award to that individual before collecting any compensation for services rendered. The bill also establishes certain penalties for (1) a person who solicits, contracts, charges, receives, or attempts such actions with respect to the preparation, presentation, or prosecution of a veterans benefits claim; and (2) any legal representative who charges, demands, receives, or collects for services rendered in connection with certain tort claims or certain claims related to Camp Lejeune.

Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals impacted by contaminated water exposure at Camp Lejeune

Estimated Size: 1000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Retired Marine (Jacksonville, NC)

Age: 65 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this bill makes it easier for veterans like me to get our due compensation without having to worry about attorneys taking too much.
  • It’s been tough dealing with health issues since my Marine days.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 5 4
Year 3 6 4
Year 5 6 4
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Attorney (Camp Lejeune, NC)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill will definitely impact how I manage my practice.
  • I understand the intent but it might limit how much I can afford to invest in some of these cases.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 7

Veteran's Health Advocate (Boston, MA)

Age: 58 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe this policy will ensure more compensation goes directly to those who deserve it.
  • It's essential we protect our veterans from unjust legal practices.

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

Nurse (New Orleans, LA)

Age: 54 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might finally relieve some of the financial burden from legal fees.
  • Our health should be the priority and legal matters shouldn't add extra stress.

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 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Veteran Organizational Leader (San Diego, CA)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill is a crucial step in ensuring veterans get the financial help they need.
  • It’s a double-edged sword for attorneys but it might prompt more ethical practices.

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 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Legal Assistant (San Antonio, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While the bill is good for claimants, I’m worried about what it may mean for my future in the firm.
  • I hope there’s a way for firms like ours to adapt.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

Policy Analyst (Washington, DC)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm glad to see a focus on weighted legal processes but wary of loopholes attorneys might exploit.
  • Overall, it's a step towards fairer compensations.

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

Retired Military Spouse (Fayetteville, NC)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy can't come sooner; we need all help possible.
  • High legal fees have been draining our resources, hoping for real changes soon.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Environmental Remediation Specialist (Orlando, FL)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's good to see policies aiming to redirect funds to affected individuals rather than overheads.
  • Objective environmental analysis could enhance future policies further.

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

Law Student (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This legislation will definitely shape my future career choices in veteran law.
  • I worry about how restrictive it will be for young attorneys trying to start out.

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 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Key Considerations