Legislative Hearing on: H.R. 1004, Love Lives on Act of 2025; H.R. 1685, Justice for ALS Veterans of 2025; H.R. 2164, Dayton National Cemetery Expansion Act of 2025; H.R. 6698, Board of Veterans Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of 2025; H.R. 6943, Veterans Burial Allowance and Reimbursement Act of 2026; Discussion Draft, National Cemetery Administration Annual Report Act of 2026; H.R. 4469, PRESUME Act; H.R. 5723, FRAUD in VA Disability Exam Act; H.R. 5339, Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness Act

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                          LEGISLATIVE HEARING5=======================================================================67                                HEARING89                               BEFORE THE1011                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY12                     ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS1314                                 OF THE1516                     COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS1718                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES1920                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2122                             SECOND SESSION2324                               __________2526                       TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 20262728                               __________2930                           Serial No. 119-463132                               __________3334       Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs3536 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3738                    Available via http://govinfo.gov3940                               __________4142                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4363-303                    WASHINGTON : 202644=======================================================================4546                     COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS4748                     MIKE BOST, Illinois, Chairman4950AUMUA AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN,       MARK TAKANO, California, Ranking51    American Samoa, Vice-Chairwoman      Member52JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               JULIA BROWNLEY, California53NANCY MACE, South Carolina           CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire54MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa       SHEILA CHERFILUS-MCCORMICK,55GREGORY F. MURPHY, North Carolina        Florida56DERRICK VAN ORDEN, Wisconsin         MORGAN MCGARVEY, Kentucky57MORGAN LUTTRELL, Texas               DELIA RAMIREZ, Illinois58JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona              NIKKI BUDZINSKI, Illinois59KEITH SELF, Texas                    TIMOTHY M. KENNEDY, New York60JEN KIGGANS, Virginia                MAXINE DEXTER, Oregon61ABE HAMADEH, Arizona                 HERB CONAWAY, New Jersey62KIMBERLYN KING-HINDS, Northern       KELLY MORRISON, Minnesota63    Mariana Islands64TOM BARRETT, Michigan6566                       Jon Clark, Staff Director67                  Matt Reel, Democratic Staff Director6869       SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS7071                    MORGAN LUTTRELL, Texas, Chairman7273AUMUA AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN,       MORGAN MCGARVEY, Kentucky, Ranking74    American Samoa                       Member75JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire76NANCY MACE, South Carolina           MAXINE DEXTER, Oregon77KEITH SELF, Texas                    KELLY MORRISON, Minnesota7879Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public80hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also81published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the82official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare83both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process84of converting between various electronic formats may introduce85unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the86current publication process and should diminish as the process is87further refined.8889                        C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S9091                              ----------9293                       TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 20269495                                                                   Page9697                           OPENING STATEMENTS9899The Honorable Morgan Luttrell, Chairman..........................     1100The Honorable Morgan McGarvey, Ranking Member....................     2101102                         SPEAKING FROM THE DAIS103104The Honorable Michael R. Turner, U.S. House of Representatives,105  (OH-10)........................................................     4106The Honorable Dina Titus, U.S. House of Representatives, (NV-01).     5107The Honorable Brian Fitzpatrick, U.S. House of Representatives,108  (PA-01)........................................................     6109The Honorable Suhas Subramanyam, U.S. House of Representatives,110  (VA-10)........................................................     6111The Honorable Gabe Evans, U.S. House of Representatives, (CO-08).     7112The Honorable Ryan Mackenzie, U.S. House of Representatives, (PA-113  07)............................................................     8114The Honorable Keith Self, U.S. House of Representatives, (TX-03).     9115116                               WITNESSES117                                Panel I118119Mr. James McCormick, Executive Director, Government Affairs,120  Vietnam Veterans of America....................................    10121122Mr. Paul Shipley, National Commander, AMVETS.....................    11123124Mrs. Tanya Wilson-Thomas, Surviving Spouse and Former Caregiver,125  Gold Star Wives of America.....................................    12126127Ms. Nancy Springer, Associate Director, National Legislative128  Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States.........    14129130                                Panel II131132Ms. Jennifer Bover, Executive Director, Pension and Fiduciary133  Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of134  Veterans Affairs...............................................    22135136        Accompanied by:137138    Mr. Glenn Powers, Deputy Under Secretary, Field Programs and139        Cemetery Operations, National Cemetery Administration,140        U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs141142    Mr. James W. Smith II, Deputy Executive Director, Policy and143        Procedures for Compensation Service, Veterans Benefits144        Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs145146                                APPENDIX147                    Prepared Statements Of Witnesses148149Mr. James McCormick Prepared Statement...........................    35150Mr. Paul Shipley Prepared Statement..............................    37151Mrs. Tanya Wilson-Thomas Prepared Statement......................    44152Ms. Nancy Springer Prepared Statement............................    46153154                          APPENDIX--continued155156Ms. Jennifer Bover Prepared Statement............................    48157158                       Statements For The Record159160ALS Network Prepared Statement...................................    53161National Association of Atomic Veterans, Inc. Prepared Statement.    54162Paralyzed Veterans of America Prepared Statement.................    60163Gold Star Spouses of America, Inc. Prepared Statement............    63164Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors Prepared Statement......    69165The Invisible Enemy Prepared Statement...........................    88166Reserve Organization of America Prepared Statement...............    90167National Organization of Veterans' Advocates, Inc. Prepared168  Statement......................................................    98169Berry Law Prepared Statement.....................................   100170ALS United Prepared Statement....................................   135171The ALS Association Prepared Statement...........................   137172The American Legion Prepared Statement...........................   138173174                          LEGISLATIVE HEARING175176                              ----------177178                       TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2026179180   Subcommittee on Disability Assistance &181                          Memorial Affairs,182                    Committee on Veterans' Affairs,183                             U.S. House of Representatives,184                                                    Washington, DC.185    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:16 a.m., in186room 360, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Morgan Luttrell187(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.188    Present: Representatives Luttrell, Self, McGarvey, Pappas,189and Morrison.190191         OPENING STATEMENT OF MORGAN LUTTRELL, CHAIRMAN192193    Mr. Luttrell. The committee will come to order. Without194objection, the chair may declare recess at any time.195    Thank you for joining us today. We are here to discuss nine196bills that would benefit veterans and their survivors.197    The bills we will be considering today, the first one will198require the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Board of199Veterans' Appeals to include in their annual report the reasons200why the Board has failed to decide benefits appeals in a timely201manner; another is to provide equity between all veterans who202are seeking transportation and private burial plot203reimbursements from the VA; require the National Cemetery204Administration (NCA) to publish an annual report like those205published by Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Veterans206Health Administration (VHA), and the Board of Veterans Appeals;207initiate the expansion of the Dayton National Cemetery,208acquiring nearby land at no charge to the Federal Government;209change the eligibility requirements for the Dependency and210Indemnity Compensation (DIC), VA's largest survivors benefit,211to surviving spouses under the age of 55 who choose to remarry212and to the survivors whose loved one passed away from service-213connected Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) before the 10-214year mark; and consider changes to how VA identifies fraudulent215disability benefit questionnaires and the evidentiary standard216for determining if some conditions are service-connected.217    The subcommittee has an important and unique218responsibility. We are responsible for overseeing veterans'219compensations, pensions, burial, fiduciary, and survivors'220benefits. We touch many parts of the VA, including Compensation221Service, the Board of Veterans' Appeals, the National Cemetery222Administration, and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.223Most importantly, this subcommittee makes an impact on veterans224and their survivors at some of the--and of the most important225times in their lives.226    The work we do affects veterans when they are seeking227disability benefits. It affects them when they are under228financial distress. It affects families when their veterans--229when their veteran loved one passes away. It also affects how230the veterans and their loved ones are honored long after they231are gone. We are responsible for reviewing legislation that232impacts veterans throughout their lives, and I am grateful that233today we will be considering these bills that ensure veterans234and their families are honored in their life and that they are235properly cared for in their death.236    I do want to highlight that the bills we are considering237today are not yet offset. This means that no mechanism has been238identified for how we will fund these bills and ensure good239policy and fiscal responsibility. That obviously goes hand-in-240hand. Our responsibility as legislators and current lawmakers,241the new spending must be offset by reduction elsewhere to242minimize the growth of our national debt. Until this offset can243be found and for other proposals, we would be unable to244consider that legislation at the full committee markup.245    I look forward to working with Chairman Bost, Ranking246Member McGarvey, and other members of this subcommittee on247these important proposals today. I also look forward to hearing248from witnesses who have joined us about how we can improve249these bills.250    I now yield to the ranking member.251252      OPENING STATEMENT OF MORGAN MCGARVEY, RANKING MEMBER253254    Mr. McGarvey. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good255morning, everyone. Thank you all for being here today and for256holding this hearing. Looks like we got a full agenda, so I am257going to get right into things today. Just want to start by258highlighting a few of the bills we are going to be hearing.259    I want to start by highlighting a bill from Representative260Subramanyam, which is the Susan E. Lukas 9-11 Servicemember261Fairness Act. I also want to recognize Susan herself, who I262understand is with us here today. Thank you so much for your263service, for your sacrifice, for being here, there you are, for264being here and for, you know, for your bravery for the men and265women alongside you that day.266    September 11th, is a day that for those of us who were267here, will never forget. I can tell you what the temperature268was like that day in the city where I was. It brought our269country together in a way that I do not think we see much right270now. Everyone was focused on how we help each other out. You271are emblematic of that. Of course, it did lead to two wars that272lasted 20 years. That created millions of veterans. We now have273to take care of those veterans on this committee.274    Thankfully, we have the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson275Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act276and other laws that are addressing a lot of exposure to toxic277substances and addressing the particular needs of this new278generation of veterans. One of those groups is the279servicemembers now, the veterans themselves who were at the280Pentagon that day, who were at the Pentagon when it was struck.281They did not get the attention; they did not get the care. They282do not have same resources that other people exposed to toxic283substances received even though there was jet fuel and fire284foam and everything else dripping from the walls in the285Pentagon that day.286    I am glad to see that H.R. 5339 is here, is going to move287out of this committee across the House floor. Ultimately, we288need to make sure this becomes law, so we fix this glaring gap289in coverage for people.290    We have also learned that some illnesses do not show up291until years after someone is exposed. That is especially true292for servicemembers exposed to radiation during their service.293That is why I am really glad we are taking up Representative294Titus' Providing Radiation Exposed Servicemembers Undisputed295Medical Eligibility (PRESUME) Act today. It is a very296straightforward bill. It is a straightforward way to make sure297that radiation-exposed veterans can actually access the care298and the benefits they have earned.299    Honestly, it is heartbreaking when you hear these stories300and see the illnesses from veterans at the Nevada Test and301Training Range that they are dealing with. Hopefully, we can302move this bill forward and finally get them those benefits.303Their counterparts at the Department of Energy already receive304these protections, I think it only makes sense that our305veterans receive the same level of protection.306    Today on the agenda, we also have Ranking Member Takano's307Fraud Reduction and Uncovering Deception (FRAUD) in VA308Disability Exam Act, which tries to crack down on a familiar309enemy of this committee, which is claim sharks and the310disability benefits questionnaires mills.311    I am also pleased that today we are discussing H.R. 7620,312the National Cemetery Administration Annual Report of 2026 from313Representative Mackenzie, a bill I am happy to co-lead with314him. This bill, simply put, it is good governance. Actually,315when they came to me with the bill, I said they do not already316do this? It requires the National Cemetery Administration to317provide Congress with an annual report with basic statistical318information about their activities and grants in the prior year319and the projections for the year ahead. I have absolutely no320reason to believe that the NCA is doing anything other than321amazing work. If there is an agency in the entire Federal322Government that is 100 percent mission-focused and dedicated to323the families it serves, it is the NCA.324    That said, having a straightforward annual report to keep325this committee and the American people informed, it just makes326sense. It helps us do our job. It helps make sure taxpayer327dollars are being used the right way. I appreciate328Representative Mackenzie for working on this important bill and329making sure that it is done in the bipartisan way our veterans330deserve.331    Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. We have got a full332agenda, but the agenda seems focused on what the committee333does, which is making sure our veterans--we honor the promise334we made to our veterans for their service to us. Thank you.335    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, Mr. McGarvey.336    I respectfully request and ask that each member hold their337statements to 3 minutes. In accordance with committee rules, I338ask unanimous consent that the following members be permitted339to participate in today's subcommittee hearing: Representative340Turner from Ohio, Representative Titus from Nevada,341Representative Hudson from North Carolina, Representative342Fitzpatrick from Pennsylvania, Representative Evans from343Colorado, Representative Mackenzie from Pennsylvania, and344Representative Subramanyam from Virginia. Without objection, so345ordered.346    It is our practice that we will forego a round of347questioning for the members. I will now recognize the members348for their testimony.349    Mr. Turner, you are now recognized, sir.350351                  STATEMENT OF MICHAEL TURNER352353    Mr. Turner. Thank you, Chairman Luttrell and Ranking Member354McGarvey, for holding this markup and considering H.R. 2164,355the Dayton National Cemetery Expansion Act of 2025.356    Currently, the historic VA Cemetery in Dayton, Ohio, is357running out of land for burials. Past expansion of the cemetery358have required cannibalization of the historic Dayton VA Medical359Center campus. Future planned expansion would not only require360the medical center campus of VA to cede more land to the361cemetery for burial use, but would also allow the cemetery to362place grave site areas in the hospital grounds. That would have363to be the only option for expansion for the burials.364    Since the VA's policy to expand the cemetery into these365alternative areas has come to light, I have been working with366the city of Dayton, the Montgomery County Land Bank, the Dayton367and Montgomery County Port Authority, to remedy this issue by368obtaining land adjacent to the cemetery for future burials.369Once this land is secured, the Montgomery County Land Bank will370donate the land to the VA Cemetery for expansion for space,371eliminating any future need to take away land from the Dayton372VA Medical Center. My bill would simply require the VA373Department to accept the land donation.374    This land legislation, which was passed by this375subcommittee during the 118th Congress by a voice vote in which376enjoys a support from several community leaders in Dayton, will377also allow families of past veterans to continue to bury their378loved ones in their hometown on this historical VA campus,379which was established shortly after the Civil War and is now a380National Historic Landmark. I and other leaders in the Dayton381community are proud of the rich historic heritage of our VA382campus and have worked tirelessly to maintain the historical383integrity of our grounds. We appreciate your support for384veterans and certainly for this bill and for our efforts to385expand these historic grounds. We thank you for your386consideration of my bill.387    I yield back.388    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.389    Ms. Titus, you are recognized for 3 minutes.390391                    STATEMENT OF DINA TITUS392393    Ms. Titus. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member394McGarvey, members of the committee. I appreciate very much395being allowed to sit in with you today to talk about the396PRESUME Act.397    In Nevada's First congressional District, I hear every day398from veterans who served honorably, returned home expecting to399get fair treatment, and instead have encountered unnecessary400barriers to the care and benefits they earned. Among them are401atomic veterans, our cold war warriors, and servicemembers who402worked at the Nevada Test Site and Training Range. These are403individuals whose missions were so highly classified that their404presence has been effectively erased even as they were exposed405to toxic radiation.406    For decades, these veterans have suffered from cancers,407pulmonary conditions, and other serious illnesses while being408told by the system that they were never there because their409records have been masked or buried behind classification. We410know the military promises to leave no soldier behind and411Congress must live up to that same commitment. That that is why412I introduced the PRESUME Act, H.R. 4469. It would eliminate the413unjust and nearly impossible requirement that atomic veterans414prove a certain radiation dose before accessing VA benefits.415    Veterans were often exposed without their knowledge and416today they are asked to provide documentation that is417controlled entirely by the government. This data has418hysterically, too, but historically been incomplete, been419unreliable, or been told, well, that was probably destroyed in420the fire in St. Louis in 1973. When the government controls all421the evidence, veterans should not bear the burden of proving422the impossible. The PRESUME Act would remove those bureaucratic423barriers and bring fairness and parity to radiation-exposed424veterans.425    This bill has been endorsed by the Disabled American426Veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), National Association427of Atomic Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and other428veterans groups. Now, there are only a few hundred of these429atomic veterans left, so we need to act now before it is too430late. These men and women played a critical role in securing431our victory in the cold war, but it was at great personal cost432and with little public recognition. It is past time that we433honor their service.434    As we continue to build on the success of the PACT Act, I435urge the committee to keep veterans who were in these atomic436situations front and center. Their service was extraordinary,437their sacrifice was honorable, and their delay in receiving438care is just unconscionable. We cannot change the past, but we439can assure that there is a future rooted in dignity,440transparency, and justice.441    I thank you for your attention to this and I urge you to442include it and keeping those atomic veterans in mind. Thank443you, Mr. Chairman.444    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, Ms. Titus.445    Mr. Fitzpatrick, sir, you are recognized for 3 minutes.446447                 STATEMENT OF BRIAN FITZPATRICK448449    Mr. Fitzpatrick. I thank the chair and the ranking member450for allowing me to speak today on my legislation, H.R. 1685,451the Justice for ALS Veterans Act.452    Mr. Chair, Mr. Ranking Member, this is a bipartisan,453bicameral bill that ensures that surviving spouses of veterans454who pass away due to ALS receive the full benefits that they455have earned. As we all know, ALS is a fast moving, aggressive,456and fatal disease. Our veterans are twice as likely to be457diagnosed compared to the general population.458    With an average life expectancy of only 2 to 5 years after459diagnosis, our ALS veterans often do not survive long enough to460meet the 8-year requirement for dependency and indemnity461compensation, leaving their families without this benefit after462their loved one passes away. Denying a surviving spouse of463benefits because their loved one did not live long enough to464meet an arbitrary requirement, I believe is a betrayal to our465commitment of those who served. The Justice for ALS Veterans466Act rights this wrong and ensures that the families of our467brave servicemembers receive the support that they need and468that they have earned.469    There is no more work to be done--I am sorry, there is much470more work to be done to accelerate research and treatment471access for ALS veterans. It is imperative that we close this472loophole that has prevented surviving families from obtaining473this support. I want to thank this committee for allowing us to474raise this issue of ALS that does plague our veterans community475twice as more frequently than the general population. I look476forward to working with you all to move this legislation477forward to honor all of our ALS veterans and their families.478    With that, I yield back.479    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.480    Mr. Subramanyam, you are recognized for 3 minutes, sir.481482                 STATEMENT OF SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM483484    Mr. Subramanyam. Thank you, Chairman Luttrell, Ranking485Member McGarvey, and the entire subcommittee for having me here486to speak on H.R. 5339, the Susan E. Lukas 9-11 Servicemember487Fairness Act, a bipartisan bill to close the gap in coverage488for those who bravely reported for duty at the Pentagon489following 9-11.490    As many know, American Airlines Flight 77 on 9-11 crashed491into the Pentagon, killing all those on board, 125 people492inside, and created a debris-filled blast. What many people may493not know is that despite the risks to their health and safety,494Pentagon employees, including many constituents of mine,495immediately returned to work, risking exposure to toxins which496caused lifelong health problems and conditions. These employees497have been left uncovered under the PACT Act. H.R. 5339 covers498this gap by extending the PACT Act to those who reported for499duty between September 11 and November 19, 2001, the day the500Pentagon was deemed safe.501    The need for this bipartisan legislation is evidenced in502the stories of constituents of mine. The heroic Pentagon503employees who immediately returned to work to protect our504national security include the namesake of this bill, the505retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Susan E. Lukas, who is506here today, if you want to wave to everyone again, put you on507the spot one more time. You know in the aftermath of returning508to work, Susan suffered persistent health issues. She was509diagnosed with a rare condition found among others who were in510the Pentagon right after 9-11. As a result, Susan needs to511purchase a costly and specialized iodizing system, for512instance, to purify her home's air. As she stated, every action513I take is designed to overcome the health challenges posed by514my time in the Pentagon on and after 9-11.515    These servicemembers who reported for duty at the Pentagon516deserve the same benefits under the PACT Act that Congress517provided to others. I urge the members of the subcommittee to518advance this bipartisan bill to support veterans like Susan. We519want to make sure that when people report to duty to keep our520country safe after events like that, that they are taken care521of and that we fulfill our promise to them to take care of522them.523    Thank you and I yield back.524    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.525    Mr. Evans, you are recognized for 3 minutes.526527                    STATEMENT OF GABE EVANS528529    Mr. Evans. Thank you, Chairman, Ranking Member, other530members of the subcommittee for the opportunity today to speak531in support of my bill, the Veterans Burial Allowance and532Reimbursement Act. This bill is personal to me, and I am proud533to be a lead sponsor of the measure to benefit veterans and534veterans families.535    I am a lifetime member of the VFW, and I have often spoken536of my own experiences flying Black Hawk helicopters for the537U.S. Army and the Colorado Army National Guard, which included538an overseas deployment to a combat zone in support of the539global war on terror. I am proud to come from a long line of540veterans. My grandfathers on both sides of the family served541this country honorably. Grandpa Evans is a career naval aviator542and Abuelo Chavez as a soldier in World War II fighting with543Patton's 3d Army.544    As someone who has personally attended the burial of545veterans before, I know how much this sacred honor matters--546excuse me, this sacred honor matters to the families and loved547ones of those who have given so much in defense of our Nation.548This bill seeks to ensure parity in burial allowances and549reimbursement for all veterans who have earned the benefit.550    Under current law, nonservice-connected burial allowances551is actually set to exceed the service-connected burial552allowance next year. That means veterans who pass away from553nonservice-connected reasons will receive more burial allowance554funds than their service-connected brothers and sisters. To fix555this disparity and ensure all veterans receive a just556disbursement for their benefits, my bill would eliminate the557distinction between a nonservice-connected and a service-558connected burial allowance, converting the existing allowance559into a general veterans benefit for both service and560nonservice-connected passing. This commonsense fix will secure561a standard and simple benefit to help the families of veterans562honor their loved ones during times of loss and grief.563    I urge my colleagues on this committee to support this564bill, look forward to working with you to advance it, and yield565back.566    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.567    Mr. Mackenzie, you are recognized for 3 minutes.568569                  STATEMENT OF RYAN MACKENZIE570571    Mr. Mackenzie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and572the entire committee for holding this hearing today. I573appreciate the work of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle574and the staff who have helped prepare our bill for today's575testimony.576    I am proud to have introduced the National Cemetery577Administration Annual Report Act of 2026, a bipartisan bill578that, as we heard, is co-introduced and led with Congressman579Morgan McGarvey of Kentucky. This legislation is about580transparency, accountability, and keeping a sacred promise to581our veterans and their families.582    The National Cemetery Administration plays a critical role583in honoring those who have worn the uniform. It is responsible584for caring for our veterans in their final resting place and585supporting grieving families during one of the most difficult586moments of their lives. Congress has a responsibility to ensure587that this work is done with dignity, foresight, and proper588oversight. Today, there is no single comprehensive public589report that clearly lays out how the National Cemetery590Administration is operating, where resources are being used591appropriately, as we heard, but what does not exist is, again,592a comprehensive report like this so we can understand all of593their operations going forward. We aim to address that.594    Under this legislation, the Department of Veterans Affairs595would be required to submit an annual publicly available report596dealing NCA operations and performance. That includes the597number of internments by cemetery, burial options available to598families, customer satisfaction metrics, cemetery construction599projects, grants awarded to State and Tribal entities for the600veterans' cemeteries, and how unclaimed veterans' remains are601handled. Importantly, it also requires that this information is602easily accessible online for families, advocates, researchers,603and policymakers. This bill strengthens congressional604oversight, supports long-term planning, and ensures that605veterans and their families receive the respect and care that606they have earned.607    I am grateful that this legislation or the intent of this608legislation is supported by leading Veterans Service609Organizations (VSO), including Vietnam Veterans of America610(VVA), Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of611America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the VA, who understand612how important transparency and accountability are to fulfilling613this final promise.614    I again want to thank Congressman McGarvey for his615partnership and the committee for considering this commonsense616bipartisan measure. I urge my colleagues to ultimately support617the bill when it comes up for a vote. I look forward to618continuing our work together on behalf of veterans and their619families.620    Thank you. With that, I yield back.621    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir. I ask that the second panel622please take your seats.623    Mr. Self, you are recognized for 3 minutes, sir.624625                    STATEMENT OF KEITH SELF626627    Mr. Self. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the628opportunity to speak today in support of my bill, H.R. 6698,629the Board of Veterans' Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act.630    The current law requires the Board of Veterans' Appeals to631issue an annual report. Within this report is a performance632measure titled ``Timely Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) Post633Hearing Decisions.'' This measure reports the percentage of AMA634hearing decisions with a disposition of held that may have been635decided within 180 days of the hearing, a benchmark that is636established by the Board. Unfortunately, the report does not637require the Board to explain why cases fail to be decided by638the 180-day goal. Veterans and VSOs do not benefit from simply639knowing that an appeal has exceeded the Board's 180-day goal.640Congress, likewise, cannot effectively conduct oversight or641legislate improvements without understanding the underlying642causes of those untimely decisions.643    The same gap exists with respect to remands. Remands are644necessary, but they can also be one of the most significant645drivers of delay in the appeals process. Yet the Board's annual646report does not currently require any systematic identification647of the factors leading to a remand. This bill will close that648gap. Specifically, it requires the Board of Veterans' Appeals649to identify in its annual report the factors contributing to650untimely decisions under the modernized appeals system and to651quantify how frequently each factor occurs. It also requires652the Board to identify the causes of remands for both legacy and653modern appeals, again, with clear data.654    This is not about assigning blame. It is about identifying655patterns. Are delays and remands being driven by staffing656shortages, incomplete medical exams, poor record development at657earlier stages, changes in law, or some other procedural658bottleneck? Without this information, neither Congress nor VA659can target reforms effectively.660    This bill does not change veterans' rights, alter the661standard of review, or interfere with the Board's independence.662It simply asks the Board to report on what is already happening663using data, let me emphasize using data, and do so in a664transparent, standardized way.665    Clear and transparent reporting helps identify where666investments and changes will have the greatest impact so that667the recent progress within the Board of Veterans' Appeals can668be sustained. Ultimately, veterans deserve an appeals system669that is not only timely, but accountable. This bill is a670modest, but meaningful step toward that goal.671    I urge my colleagues to support it and I yield back.672    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.673    Good morning, everyone. Well traveled, I see. Thank you for674joining us today. I know that the weather is not playing nice,675so, again, thank you for making time.676    Our second panel, I will make the introductions. Mr. James677McCormick, executive director of government affairs at Vietnam678Veterans of America. Mr. Paul Shipley, national commander of679American Veterans (AMVETS). Ms. Tanya Wilson--''Tan-ya'' or680``Tawn-ya''? Thank you. Ms. Tanya Wilson-Thomas, surviving681spouse and former caregiver from the Gold Star Wives of682America. Ms. Nancy Springer, associate director of National683Legislative Service at Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United684States. Good to see you again, Ms. Springer, as always.685    I ask that the panel please stand and raise your right686hand.687    [Witnesses sworn.]688    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you and let the record reflect that all689witnesses answered in the affirmative. You may be seated.690    Mr. McCormick, sir, you are recognized for 5 minutes to691provide your opening testimony.692693                  STATEMENT OF JAMES MCCORMICK694695    Mr. McCormick. Thank you very much. Chairman, Ranking696Member, and members of this honorable committee, I want to697thank you for this opportunity to be here today. As recognized,698my name is James McCormick. I am the executive director of699Government Affairs for Vietnam Veterans of America. I am also a70022-year Army veteran who rose through the enlisted ranks701starting as a private, retiring as a captain, with 16 of those702years enlisted and a bunch of those years as a noncommissioned703officer. I have been in those ranks. I served during the cold704war, the Gulf War, and Operation Iraqi Freedom.705    Vietnam Veterans of America was founded on the shared706resolve of veterans who returned from a very real war to a707country that was often unprepared or sometimes unwilling to708accept them or to understand the cost of that very real war.709Founded in 1978, this congressionally chartered organization710grew out of Vietnam veterans working together, often711unofficially and without institutional support, to demand712recognition, including recognition for those invisible wounds713of war that would later become a fighting effort to recognize714Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).715    Guided by our principle that never again will one716generation of veterans abandon another, VVA has evolved from717advocating for Vietnam veterans only to advocating for all718veterans. We strive to ensure that as Vietnam veterans age,719they receive the healthcare they have earned. Much more720importantly, we strive to ensure that future generations of721veterans receive a much better treatment than Vietnam veterans722received when they came home.723    The nine items we have been asked to address largely align724with VVA's advocacy, and we would likely endorse and robustly725support them all: H.R. 1685, H.R. 2164, H.R. 1004, H.R. 6698,726H.R. 4469, H.R. 5723, H.R. 5339, H.R. 6943, and also the727Discussion Draft on the National Cemetery Administration Annual728Report Act.729    I commend this subcommittee for working together and doing730what many cannot seemingly do in this country. Too often it731seems that negativity and party line politics have seeped into732veterans' policies in ways that create competition instead of733compassion, delay instead of care, and noise instead of734solutions. We debate labels, errors of service, and party735positions while veterans struggle with housing, healthcare,736suicide risk, financial insecurity, and the dignity at the end737of life.738    It does not matter what branch they served in, it does not739matter when they served, and it does not matter whether they740faced combat, supported supply lines, maintained equipment,741gathered intelligence, or served in an administrative role.742Every one of them raised their right hand and accepted the same743obligation. Every one of them made sacrifices that shaped their744lives, their families, and this Nation.745    Advocacy must never devolve into deciding which veterans746are most politically convenient to support. The role of747Congress is to ensure that every veteran and every veteran's748family not be hampered by their service and can live with749stability, access care without unnecessary barriers, and age750with dignity.751    As we look at the warrior ethos, it is clear that it says I752will never leave a fallen comrade behind. I will never leave753anyone behind. That is an oath. That is a commitment, and that754is something that we as a Nation must live up to and ensure755that we are working together across party lines, across wartime756service lines and peacetime service lines to ensure that we are757doing the right thing for our veterans and their families.758    Thank you very much, and I look forward to your questions759at any time.760761    [The Prepared Statement Of James McCormick Appears In The762Appendix]763764    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.765    Mr. Shipley, you are recognized for 5 minutes, sir.766767                   STATEMENT OF PAUL SHIPLEY768769    Mr. Shipley. Chairman Luttrell, Ranking Member McGarvey,770and distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of771AMVETS, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the772legislation before you today.773    As the Nation's most inclusive, congressionally chartered774veterans service organization, AMVETS represents more than 20775million veterans from the Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve776components. The bills before the subcommittee go to the heart777of our national priorities: mental health, survivor equity, and778accountability in the veterans benefits system. While they779address different policy areas, they share a common goal of780ensuring that veterans and their families are not failed by the781systems meant to support them after service.782    First, the Love Lives On Act of 2025. AMVETS strongly783supports this legislation. Under current law, surviving spouses784who remarry before age 55 lose their dependency and indemnity785compensation and survivor benefits annuities. Because most post7869-11 surviving spouses were widowed in their 20's or 30's, more787than 95 percent choose not to remarry to avoid this penalty. A788servicemember's sacrifice does not diminish because their789surviving spouse finds companionship again. This country cannot790claim to honor the fallen while penalizing the families they791left behind.792    Second, the Justice for ALS Veterans Act of 2025. AMVETS793offers full support for this bill. Although ALS is794presumptively service-connected, current survivor benefits795rules ignore the disease's short course. Enhanced DIC requires7968 years of total disability, but ALS veterans typically and797tragically survive only 2 to 5 years. This legislation removes798that requirement and ensures survivors receive appropriate799compensation. We also support the recording requirement to800identify other high mortality service-connected conditions so801families are not penalized simply because a disease progresses802too quickly.803    Third, the Susan E. Lukas 9-11 Servicemember Fairness Act.804I would like to recognize Mrs. Lukas being here today. Her805courage is a demonstration for all of us to follow. AMVETS is806proud to stand with the Reserve Organization of America in807supporting this bill. While Congress addressed many toxic808exposure gaps through the PACT Act and the Zadroga Act,809servicemembers who reported to the Pentagon after September 11,8102001, were left behind. Despite working for months in811environments contaminated with asbestos, jet fuel, and812pulverized building materials, these veterans are forced to813prove direct service connection for cancers and respiratory814illnesses that emerge years later. This bill would extend815presumptive coverage and finally close a longstanding and816unjust gap.817    Fourth, the PRESUME Act. AMVETS strongly supports the818legislation for atomic veterans exposed to ionizing radiation.819Current VA policy relies on decades old reconstruction820estimates that are scientifically flawed and administratively821harmful, despite the fact that radiation affects individuals822differently. If a veteran participated in a recognized823radiation risk activity and later develops a service-connected824illness, care should never be delayed or denied.825    Fifth, the Board of Veterans' Appeals Annual Report826Transparency Act. AMVETS supports this bill based on decades of827experience representing veterans before the Board. While the828Appeals Modernization Act made progress, the progress remains829opaque. Many decisions are remands that prolong resolution830rather than delivering finality. This legislation would improve831transparency around delays and remands and ensure the Board is832evaluated on outcomes, not just volumes of claims.833    Finally, the Fraud and VA Disability Exam Act. AMVETS would834support this bill if amended. Fraud must be addressed, but835oversight must be precise. Veterans should not be penalized for836relying on private providers or for minor clerical errors837beyond their control. Fraud prevention must not become a new838barrier to earned benefits.839    In closing, the legislation before the subcommittee840presents real opportunities to strengthen the system veterans841and their families rely on. AMVETS stands ready to work with842you to advance fairness, accountability, and finality, and to843ensure that honoring service means supporting veterans and844survivors long after the uniform comes off.845    Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to846your questions.847848    [The Prepared Statement Of Paul Shipley Appears In The849Appendix]850851    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir.852    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas, you are recognized for 5 minutes.853854                STATEMENT OF TANYA WILSON-THOMAS855856    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Good morning, Chairman Luttrell,857Ranking Member McGarvey, members of the subcommittee. My name858is Tanya Lynn Wilson-Thomas, surviving spouse of U.S. Marine859Dwight Anthony Thomas, Sr.860    I am a member of Gold Star Wives of America Incorporated,861which was founded in 1945 as a service organization of World862War II widows. We are the surviving spouses of our Nation's863military servicemembers. We were created to advocate for864policies that support quality of life for military survivors865and their children due to their servicemember's spouse's death866on Active Duty or as a result of service-connected conditions.867We have been advocating for families for 80 years and are868continuing to do so.869    I am here to express support for H.R. 1004, the Love Lives870On Act, and H.R. 1685, the Justice for ALS Veterans Act. I am871providing testimony on only these two bills as they are most872impactful to our membership. The Love Lives On Act and the873Justice for ALS Veterans Act are two bills which would have a874positive impact on our members and we urge the committee and875the Congress to see them through to enactment.876    While our members have different stories and journeys, we877have all arrived to the same destination. We have all found878ourselves experiencing the trauma of loss of our spouse, the879upheaval of our lives, and the weight of learning to880incorporate that loss into our everyday existence. We are also881tasked with simultaneously helping our children to do the same.882    The Love Lives On Act affirms our Nation's responsibility883to stand with Gold Star wives and their husbands--and husbands884beyond their moment of loss. It provides essential recognition885by acknowledging that our sacrifices are perpetual, just as the886benefits provided to spouses have a perpetual indemnification887purpose that should not be threatened. It asserts that honoring888service must emphatically include honoring those who constantly889endure life with the rigors of its sacrifices along with its890lasting associated cost.891    My late husband Dwight Senior was a proud U.S. Marine who892suffered greatly due to several service-connected illnesses. He893was on emergency standby with his unit to deploy to the Persian894Gulf when he collapsed and underwent brain surgery. He895collapsed with a brain hemorrhage and underwent brain surgery896at the age of 23. I was 22, our children were 2 and 4. I then897became his military caregiver until his death 8 years later.898    Support for the Love Lives On Act affirms that our Nation899does not forget but remembers that although they are no longer900physically here, our spouse's service and sacrifices are still901recorded in the annals of our Nation's American history. This902act provides the reinstatement of the benefits of the Survivor903Benefit Plan and, in addition, it provides reinstatement of904TRICARE benefits when a subsequent marriage ends in divorce or905death. Currently, a survivor would lose eligibility.906    This bill ensures that military survivors are not forgotten907in a real and tangible way, but provided the resource to908rebuild stability in their lives after sacrifice on behalf of a909grateful Nation. Gold Star Wives also strongly supports H.R.9101685. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, ALS, this is a devastating911and unforgiving disease that has taken the lives of those who912serve this Nation with honor. The families, after acting as913their loved ones military caregiver, are left to bear914unimaginable loss. Then, because of ALS rapid progression, they915are often left with significant financial loss due to the law's916inflexibility in recognizing that progression.917    The report on additional medical conditions should commence918without delay. Gold Star Wives of America Incorporated urges919the committee to extend eligibility for increased survivor920benefits to all families whose servicemember died due to ALS921before October 1, 2025. All surviving spouses with ALS-related922deaths have similar experience, irrespective of the date of923death. This bill represents accountability for servicemembers.924    Finally, members of the subcommittee, I close in asking for925your support for these bills. The ALS bill, it acknowledges926respect for, compassion for the families by streamlining access927to care, benefits, and much-needed answers. Supporting this is928not only good policy, but it is our moral obligation.929    I close in asking you to work together constructively and930how to accomplish moving these bills beyond this first step.931For 80 years, Gold Star Wives has seen this committee, which932formed in 1946, the same age as our organization, come together933on issues affecting veterans and survivors. We are asking that934you do so again. We are asking that you proudly build on the935foundation of President Abraham Lincoln's pledge to care for936those who borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan. He937knew this was morally just. We know that you believe the same938in the end.939    Thanks again for your support. Thank you for the940opportunity to hold forum with each of you today.941942    [The Prepared Statement Of Tanya Wilson-Thomas Appears In943The Appendix]944945    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, ma'am.946    Ms. Springer, you are recognized for 5 minutes.947948                  STATEMENT OF NANCY SPRINGER949950    Ms. Springer. Good morning. Chairman Luttrell, Ranking951Member McGarvey, and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of952the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in the United953States and its auxiliary, thank you for the opportunity to954present our views on the legislation before this subcommittee955today. My written testimony outlines the VFW's position on all956the bills under consideration. This morning, I will highlight957three.958    First, the VFW supports H.R. 1685, the Justice for ALS959Veterans Act of 2025. This legislation would extend Enhanced960Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, or DIC, to surviving961spouses of veterans who die from ALS, regardless of how long962the veteran lived after diagnosis. Currently, VA pays surviving963spouses enhanced DIC only if the veteran is rated totally964disabled for at least 8 years prior to death and if the965marriage lasts at least 8 years.966    While VA presumes ALS to be service-connected and typically967assigns a total disability rating at diagnosis, the 8-year968disability requirement is fundamentally incompatible with the969realities of this disease. ALS is a rapidly progressive970internal illness with a typical life expectancy of just 2 to 5971years following diagnosis. Consequently, many families can972never meet the 8-year disability threshold through no fault of973their own. H.R. 1685 would remove this unattainable requirement974while preserving the 8-year marriage rule, ensuring surviving975spouses receive the full survivor benefits Congress intended.976    This issue is deeply personal to the VFW. Chris Mulholland,977United States Marine Corps, retired, VFW member, and ALS978patient, led our organization's longstanding advocacy to reform979ALS survivor benefits, including spearheading the adoption of a980related VFW resolution. Major Mulholland spoke powerfully about981the toll ALS takes not only on veterans, but also on families982who suddenly become full-time caregivers while facing the rapid983decline of their veteran along with related emotional trauma984and financial uncertainty. Tragically, Major Mulholland himself985lived fewer than 8 years after his ALS diagnosis in 2020,986embodying the very injustice the bill seeks to correct.987    Second, the VFW supports H.R. 5723, the Fraud Reduction and988Uncovering Deception in VA Disability Exams Act. Veterans use989VA disability benefits questionnaires, or DBQs, which are990available on VA's publicly accessible website, to document991medical evidence supporting disability compensation claims.992Because DBQs often provide foundational evidence, their993accuracy is essential to the integrity of the VA claims994process.995    Unfortunately, their importance has also made them a target996for exploitation. Some bad actors charge veterans for997assistance that VA credited representatives provide at no998charge. Others falsely promise guaranteed outcomes, encourage999veterans to avoid VA examinations, or claim access to private1000providers who will secure higher ratings. In more serious1001cases, affiliate health care providers charge fees to1002manufacture diagnoses or exaggerate conditions to obtain1003benefits beyond what the evidence supports.1004    H.R. 5723 would require VA to establish a formal process to1005identify and report suspected DBQ-related fraud, mandate1006referrals to appropriate authorities, and implement a recurring1007audit program to monitor both reported and detected fraud.1008Together, these reforms would create a systematic and1009accountable approach to addressing DBQ fraud, one that would1010protect honest veterans and preserve trust in the disability1011compensation system.1012    Finally, the VFW supports H.R. 6698, the Board of Veterans'1013Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of 2025. This1014legislation would require the Board of Veterans' Appeals, or1015BVA, to identify in its annual report the factors contributing1016to untimely decisions and remands. Due to the Board's workload,1017veterans can wait up to 2 years and sometimes beyond for a1018decision and even longer if they request a hearing. Remands to1019the agency of original jurisdiction further delay final1020decision. In Fiscal Year 2024 alone, BVA remanded more than 401021percent of appeals, further extending resolution timelines and1022creating uncertainty for veterans awaiting their final1023disposition.1024    Requiring BVA to identify and report the drivers of delay1025would improve transparency and provide the data needed to1026strengthen processes and reduce inefficiencies. This1027transparency would enhance oversight, improve accountability,1028and build confidence that BVA is handling appeals fairly and1029consistently.1030    In conclusion, these three bills collectively would ensure1031that veterans and their survivors are treated with the1032fairness, integrity, and urgency their service deserves.1033    Chair Luttrell, Ranking Member McGarvey, thank you for the1034opportunity to present the VFW's views. I look forward to1035answering your questions.10361037    [The Prepared Statement Of Nancy Springer Appears In The1038Appendix]10391040    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, Ms. Springer.1041    Mr. Self, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your line of1042questioning.1043    Mr. Self. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1044    Mr. McCormick, I want to explore the 6698 with you. You1045said that it could drive real change. Can you elaborate on1046that?1047    Mr. McCormick. Yes, sir.1048    Mr. Self. This, of course, is the Board of Veterans'1049Appeals Annual Report Transparency.1050    Mr. McCormick. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. What this1051does is it opens up an opportunity for more transparency. As we1052look at common sense approaches to, number one, ensure that1053what we are doing is both monitored and overseen, we believe1054that an Annual Report Transparency Act of 2025 would help1055create that. It identifies root issues, training quality. VVA1056frequently calls for appeals reform and transparency to reduce1057backlogs, delays affecting veterans, indirect benefits through1058pressure for improvements, aligned with priorities, and added1059to the workload is at risk.1060    Mr. Self. Well, my real question is, who benefits from1061this? We often talk about inputs here. You know, we love to set1062up new offices and talk about inputs. I want to know, do the1063veterans themselves benefit from this? That should be the goal1064of what we are trying to do here.1065    Mr. McCormick. Absolutely. I believe that is that is the1066intent here, sir, of this bill. We believe that it would1067improve a level of trust in the system and also remove some1068additional barriers that have frequently plagued especially our1069generation of veterans, the Vietnam Veterans of America.1070    Mr. Self. With that, Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time,1071I yield back.1072    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, Mr. Self.1073    Mr. Pappas, sir, you are recognized for 5 minutes.1074    Mr. Pappas. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to1075everyone on the witness panel for their testimony here today1076and for your service and commitment to our Nation's veterans1077and their families. I appreciate that you all have spoken up1078loudly and clearly in favor of the Justice for ALS Veterans1079Act. I appreciate my colleague, Representative Fitzpatrick, who1080was here earlier to testify on behalf of that bipartisan1081partisan bill that we introduced together.1082    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas, thank you for relating your own1083personal experience. I am sorry for your loss, and I appreciate1084the way you talked about the moral obligation that we have on1085this committee to get it right for survivors and for families1086who have sacrificed so much for this great country.1087    We know specifically with ALS that it is a devastating,1088progressive disease. It affects veterans at a rate twice the1089rate of the general population, and we are learning more about1090ALS, but there is still so much we do not know about the1091disease, no known cause, and certainly no cure for it. Veterans1092with ALS and their families deserve greater understanding and1093the kind of benefits that we strive to provide on an equitable1094basis to all those who wear the uniform. I think updating1095current VA policy to better reflect the reality faced by1096veterans with ALS and their families is simple common sense,1097and it is the right thing to do and it is the moral thing to1098do. Thank you for underscoring that.1099    Ms. Springer, I appreciate you relating the personal1100experience of families that have struggled with ALS. I think1101the current 8-year total disability requirement for enhanced1102DIC benefits simply does not align with the medical reality1103faced by ALS patients and certainly their families and1104survivors. I am wondering if you can just underscore for us why1105maintaining that 8-year disability requirement for benefits1106poses harm to survivors of veterans with ALS, even though that1107they already have the service connection and total disabilities1108already recognized. Why do we need to change that 8-year1109window?1110    Ms. Springer. Actually it is fundamentally inequitable and1111wholly incompatible with the realities of this disease. The1112lifespan of an ALS patient is between 2 and 5 years, as shown1113by my VFW colleague, Major Mulholland, who lived fewer than 81114years before his death. Without recognizing that, we are1115putting an unattainable burden on these survivors who have1116suffered so much. Devastating disease and family members1117frequently become full-time caregivers, giving up their jobs,1118giving up their financial security, and we are asking them to1119attain something that they just cannot. That is why we think1120that that is totally incompatible with the realities of this1121disease and totally unfair.1122    Mr. Pappas. Well, thank you for those comments. I do think1123we need to give these families compassion and understanding. I1124think this bill does that, and so I hope that the committee can1125find a way to move this forward soon.1126    With that, I yield back.1127    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, sir. The vote has been called in1128the House. The subcommittee will stand in recess subject to the1129call of the chair. I expect to reconvene 10 minutes after the1130start of the last vote. What that means, ladies and gentlemen,1131is we have to go across the street to cast our votes and we1132will be back as quick as possible.1133    [Recess.]1134    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you for giving us some grace. I forgot1135to gavel out. Now I am gaveling back in. We are good to go. It1136is the rules. Apologize.1137    I will recognize ranking member for his opening line of1138questioning.1139    Mr. McGarvey. Thank you all so much. Thank you, Mr.1140Chairman, for having this panel here today.1141    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas, I want to start with you. First of all,1142thank you for being here. Thank you for your courage throughout1143this whole ordeal, not just in taking care of your husband and1144your family, but in being here to tell us that story.1145    I am not sure if you have had a chance to read the VA's1146testimony on the Love Lives On Act right now, but I hope you1147did because I want to get your reaction to it. In particular,1148the VA says, and I want to quote what it says here, quote,1149``The existing marriage restrictions help manage and allocate1150VA resources effectively.''1151    Now, they tried to make that sound as bland as humanly1152possible, but to me, that is a lot of government speak that we1153are going to take this away from you. I want to know, really1154and truly, again, thank you for your courage and bravery in1155being here, but for you, for other survivors, what does it say1156to you guys when the VA boils your losses down to a budgeting1157exercise?1158    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Thank you for that. First of all, when1159it is stated as such, it really means that we have to pay more1160attention to ``On behalf of a grateful Nation.'' If we pay1161attention to that statement, ``On behalf of a grateful1162Nation,'' our sacrifices were on behalf of a grateful Nation,1163then the VA should not state it as such, but be very specific1164in how we are to be--how we should have access to resources.1165Really and truly, we are working diligently to try to have some1166semblance of normalcy, have a life, rebuild a life after the1167rug was pulled out from underneath ourselves and our children.1168    Gold Star wives and husbands, we need the support of the1169government to provide resources to help rebuild the life. When1170we hear that stated in such a way, it makes us understand that1171that is not really the goal, and that is not what we want to1172understand about our system.1173    Mr. McGarvey. The language is seemingly bland. The impact1174is absolutely----1175    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. It is devastating.1176    Mr. McGarvey. Devastating.1177    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. It is devastating. It is devastating.1178    Mr. McGarvey. I appreciate you sharing your personal side1179of this because I am also afraid that VA is trying to rewrite1180the story with the American public about what Dependency and1181Indemnity Compensation, or DIC, is and the purpose behind it.1182    Yes, DIC, Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, provides1183money to people whose spouses are killed because of their1184service. This has never been just a check. It is always been1185more than that. This is an acknowledge, as you said, when you1186say, ``On behalf of a grateful Nation,'' when you sign up, when1187you put that flag on your shoulder, when you put on the1188uniform, willing to sacrifice everything to serve us and keep1189us free, we make you a promise. That promise is a legal1190promise. That promise is a moral promise. It says, we are going1191to take care of you and we are going to take care of your1192family.1193    The reality is my brother is Active Duty right now. No, no1194servicemember serves alone. They have a team behind them. Your1195service, your sacrifice has to be recognized. It is especially1196true for families of disabled veterans. Their service does not1197end when the veteran passes away and it certainly does not1198disappear if that spouse is fortunate enough to find love1199again.1200    You told your story and your husband was injured when you1201were 22.1202    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Pardon me?1203    Mr. McGarvey. You told your story. Your husband was?1204    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. He was 22 when he, yes, developed a1205blood--a brain hemorrhage at the age of 22.1206    Mr. McGarvey. Then you----1207    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Well, excuse me, he was 23. I was 22.1208    Mr. McGarvey. You were 22.1209    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Yes.1210    Mr. McGarvey. Then took care of him for 8 years?1211    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Yes, I did.1212    Mr. McGarvey. You know, I just say this, like that does not1213disappear. Your service does not disappear, especially if you1214are able to find love again and fortunate enough to find love1215again.1216    One of the reasons we are talking about this is it says1217cost. The Love Lives On Act is supposed to cost $2 billion over121810 years. Look, I am not saying that is not a lot of money, but1219let us look at where some of the other priorities are. Just1220this year in the One Big Beautiful Bill, there is a provision1221in it which cuts the tax off of firearm suppressors, silencers,1222over the same 10-year period that we are taking money away from1223our Gold Star spouses. We are giving it to make firearm1224silencers cheaper. That to me is not a trade that we should be1225doing. The same amount of money to pay for silencers, but they1226cannot find money to pay for survivor's benefits.1227    I appreciate you being here to testify and I hope the VA1228will rethink its opposition to this bill.1229    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.1230    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Thank you.1231    Mr. Luttrell. I was actually going to use the VA's1232testimony and ask something similar, Mrs. Thomas, so he beat me1233to that. Great job. Not really, but great job.1234    I try to put myself in the situation, especially in this1235position of--because I have spoken to a lot of spouses, a lot1236of Gold Star spouses. I lost a lot of teammates over the two1237wars, and a lot of my friends lost a lot. Gave it all just like1238you did. I try to appreciate the perspective that the VA is1239providing us--and then I asked them, have you ever had--have1240you had conversations with Gold Star spouses? A spouse's job is1241probably the most challenging job there is. Saw a pretty1242interesting T-shirt one time, said, ``A Navy wife is the1243hardest job in the military.'' I agree with that.1244    I do not understand why it is even a conversation that we1245have to have that you would take something from someone who1246walked that pathway alongside us or those members that served.1247The functionality of the military through its men and women is1248successful because of a lot of things, but most certainly the1249family, because the spouses--my spouse looked at me every day1250and said, you are doing great things for our country, and we1251are here for you. If something had happened to me and then my1252wife had gotten her benefits, in my opinion, that is something1253that she earned forever.1254    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Thank you.1255    Mr. Luttrell. I wholeheartedly support the idea that you1256have earned those benefits, whether or not you get remarried1257again or whomever under the age of 55.1258    As Mr. McGarvey, I do not look at it as dollar bills. I do1259not. Someone who works in Congress, whose job is to spend1260money, I am speaking as a veteran, that is something that you1261earned, and it is--no one has that right to take that away from1262you, in my opinion.1263    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Thank you.1264    Mr. Luttrell. The challenge is obviously getting there from1265here, which we are working on a daily basis to make sure that1266that does happen. I think speaking to you, Mrs. Wilson-Thomas,1267is that I want you to know that he and I agree wholeheartedly.1268Since I am the chairman and ranking member, in this1269subcommittee will carry this all the way to the finish line or1270damn sure die trying.1271    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Thank you.1272    Mr. Luttrell. I had a young lady, Ms. Patsy Dietz, sit in1273my office, and I have been friends with her a long time. She is1274remarried to another friend of mine who was in the military. I1275got to tell you, I was present when she lost her husband, and1276she came back last year to visit with me. I looked her in the1277face, I was like, you do not have to explain this to me. I1278understand. It is making sure that everyone else does, because1279you are a--you know, being in the military is a very small1280sorority or fraternity. Unfortunately, that, you know, that1281fraternity that you are a part of, losing someone is--it is not1282one anybody should have to be a part of. We are doing our1283absolute to make sure that you get what you deserve and you1284keep it.1285    Okay. Ms. Springer, when it comes to ALS----1286    Mrs. Wilson-Thomas. Thank you.1287    Mr. Luttrell. Yes, ma'am. When it comes to ALS, you know,1288if we can understand how the brain works, that would be an1289amazing thing. The window at which someone with ALS or any1290other neurological disease, you know, it is kind of a rolling1291tide. I think until we can understand exactly, you know, how1292this thing functions, we are kind of throwing darts at a1293dartboard.1294    I can appreciate that 8-year window is substantially wrong.1295The timeframe in which it was created to what we understand1296about the brain currently, it has changed. I hate to say, what1297does it look like or what is necessary or what is the sweet1298spot that we should pay attention to? The one that you give me1299is going to be argued amongst everyone and then we have to make1300the decision. That is the hard part about our job. We cannot1301necessarily decide on who is right or wrong. We have to take a1302step forward.1303    This place loves to have problems. This place loves to talk1304about the problems we have. It does not seem to be the place1305that wants to solve many problems. On this committee, we do1306everything that we possibly can to solve those problems. You1307may not have this answer for me, but I need--we, if I may, sir,1308where is it? What is the next step? What does the timeline need1309to look like? What is most beneficial for those that are1310suffering from ALS and the families, to put them in a place--I1311am not--you know, you cannot say put them in their comfort zone1312because there is nothing comfortable about this at all.1313    It is, hopefully, something that we can change as science1314shows up with medicine. To now, to date, you know, we have to1315pray to God every day that those that are suffering from this,1316you know, they do their best to live in peace. I do not know if1317you have an answer to what I just kind of threw at you, but.1318    Ms. Springer. Mr. Chairman, we, we really thank you for1319your concern about this matter. I gave the personal story of1320one of my VFW comrades, Major Mulholland. I did not know him1321personally, but I do know people who did. Unfortunately, it is1322a very devastating, fast-moving disease. People go from being1323essentially normal to being very incapacitated in a very short1324amount of time. Along the way their family members often are1325the caregivers, so they have to leave their jobs and spouse or1326family members leave their jobs and watch that happen to their1327loved one, to their veterans. There is a huge emotional toll on1328the family members. There is loss of financial security.1329    I would suggest that we stay plugged in with medical1330science and use data to determine if it is not 8 years, where1331is it? We would say no time limit at all. This is such a1332devastating disease. Once that person dies, and it is likely1333going to be between 2 and 5 years that that surviving spouse1334does get that extra enhanced DIC. It is not a princely sum, but1335every little bit helps because that family's financial1336situation will have degraded tremendously from the time before1337diagnosis.1338    Mr. Luttrell. Should it be a timeframe more than a----1339    Ms. Springer. Conditions based?1340    Mr. Luttrell. A phase in which the conditions have become1341more exacerbated.1342    Ms. Springer. Okay. That is--right.1343    Mr. Luttrell. If you put--you cannot put a timeframe window1344in----1345    Ms. Springer. Right.1346    Mr. Luttrell [continuing]. because everyone is different.1347When it comes to science and medicine, and I speak on how1348academia is very siloed, gathering that information may be more1349challenging than saying, hey, look, if a certain individual has1350this systematic diagnoses, they have reached that specific time1351instead of a 2-, 4-, 6-, 8-year window. That is something we1352are going to have to figure out.1353    Ms. Springer. That may be a very viable alternate viewpoint1354is to look at it from the basis of condition instead of time1355limit, conditions based, preference it on conditions based.1356    Mr. Luttrell. We have not asked those questions. Who in the1357VA do you deal with directly with this issue?1358    Ms. Springer. I have not directly.1359    Mr. Luttrell. All right. Well, I am going to find out who1360that is and have this conversation to follow up. Hang on for 11361second.1362    Well, it is just me and you guys in here today. Washington,1363DC, is a busy place. I wish we all had the answer for the1364problems that we not only presented here today, but that live1365in the veteran space. It seems forever changing. The problem1366when you inject politics and the government on top of something1367that is so sacred as our veteran community, we are the ones1368that get lost and we are having to wade through that.1369    I will close with thank you all for coming and sitting in1370on this panel and sharing this information. We will--the1371chairman and--the ranking member and I will move on this.1372    With that, thank you and you are excused.1373    The third panel, you may be seated. Mr. Smith, Mr. Powers,1374Ms. Bover, are you ready?1375    Thank you to the witnesses for joining us today. From the1376Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Cemetery1377Administration, the lead witness for the VA is Ms. Jennifer1378Bover, executive director of Pensions and Fiduciary Services at1379the Veterans Benefits Administration. Ms. Bover is accompanied1380by Mr. James Smith, deputy executive director of Compensation1381Services at the Veterans Benefits Administration; Mr. Glenn1382Power is deputy undersecretary for Field Programs and Cemetery1383Operations at the National Cemetery Administration.1384    I ask that all witnesses please stand. Raise your right1385hand.1386    [Witnesses sworn.]1387    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you. Let the record reflect that all1388witness have answered in the affirmative. You may be seated.1389    Ms. Bover, you are now recognized for 5 minutes to present1390the Department's testimony.13911392                  STATEMENT OF JENNIFER BOVER13931394    Ms. Bover. Good morning, Chairman Luttrell, Ranking Member1395McGarvey, and the members of the subcommittee. Thank you for1396the opportunity today to discuss the Department of Veterans1397Affairs' views on several bills that would affect VA programs1398and services. Supporting me today is Mr. James Smith, deputy1399executive director, Compensation Service, and Mr. Glenn Powers,1400deputy undersecretary for Field Programs and Cemetery1401Operations. Our board partners are not able to attend today's1402hearing.1403    Unfortunately, I will not be able to speak on H.R. 6698,1404Board of Veterans' Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of14052025. I will be taking those questions for the record.1406    At VA, we recognize the sacrifice that veterans,1407servicemembers, their families, and survivors have made serving1408our country. It is our job to serve them as well as they have1409served us. VA believes clarity and transparency allows us to1410provide high-quality care along with modernized benefits and1411services. We welcome the opportunity to provide insight into1412these proposed pieces of legislation. We have provided detailed1413comments in the written testimony to include areas of support1414and concern VA has on today's legislation.1415    VA supports the intent of H.R. 1004, the Love Lives On Act1416of 2025, and its focus on ensuring that eligible survivors1417receive support from VA following the loss of a veteran. VA has1418determined that the remarriage restrictions currently in place1419for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation and Medal of Honor1420special pension are consistent with that intent. The remarriage1421restrictions align with provisions for a multitude of Federal1422benefits across varying agencies and departments.1423    VA supports H.R. 1685, the Justice for ALS Veterans Act of14242025, subject to appropriations and if amended. VA respectfully1425requests further discussion on section 3 of this bill, which1426requires a report of other conditions that should be treated in1427the same manner as ALS due to high mortality rates. The concept1428of a high mortality rate lacks a standardized government1429definition as there is not a universal set of metrics to define1430this concept. We are happy to work with the committee on1431identifying what may constitute a high mortality rate and the1432service-connected conditions that may qualify for this1433designation.1434    VA appreciates the intent of H.R. 5723, the FRAUD in VA1435Disability Exam Act of 2025. However, VA does not support this1436bill. VA is concerned about the requirements to notify1437individuals whose DBQs are suspected of fraud. Under current1438practice, if fraud is suspected, VA typically orders a new exam1439and revises ratings as needed to ensure fairness. VA does not1440support the proposed restriction of reopening or changing1441benefit decisions based on investigations unless the individual1442is convicted of fraud. The time required and the higher bar of1443evidence needed to secure a fraud conviction eliminates VA's1444ability to correct errors in a shorter timeframe than needed1445for a Federal criminal proceeding to unfold, potentially1446harming veterans who are not involved in fraudulent activity.1447    VA does not support the Discussion Draft entitled1448``Veterans Burial Allowance and Reimbursement Act of 2026.'' VA1449appreciates and supports the need to make changes to the burial1450benefit structure to alleviate the issue that occurred on1451October 1st of 2025, where the combination of paying1452nonservice-connected burial and plot allowances is now greater1453than the service-connected burial allowance. VA's1454recommendation within the written testimony provides a more1455streamlined plan to amend the burial benefit structure that1456would allow VA to preserve the distinction of a higher rate for1457service-connected burials that Congress has had in place since14581973.1459    Across VA, we continue to improve services to meet the1460needs of veterans, servicemembers, and their families and1461survivors. We thank the committee for your continued support.1462    Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you1463today, Mr. Chairman. This concludes my statement.14641465    [The Prepared Statement Of Jennifer Bover Appears In The1466Appendix]14671468    Mr. Luttrell. The written statement Ms. Bover will be1469entered into the hearing record. We will now move to1470questioning.1471    Dr. Morrison, are you ready to go? I will hand it off to1472you if you would like.1473    Ms. Morrison. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I want to1474thank you for holding this hearing. Thanks to the panel for1475being here. I also want to thank the gentleman--you, Mr. Chair,1476and the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Hudson, for your1477partnership and leadership on the Love Lives On Act. I am1478pleased to see that the bill is on the docket for today's1479hearing and I want to use my time to continue making the case1480that we need this legislation. No surviving military spouse1481should have to choose between finding love again and keeping1482the benefits their family deserves.1483    Ms. Bover, I would like to turn to you for my questions.1484The Love Lives On Act was considered at a legislative hearing1485held by this subcommittee in April 2024. During that hearing,1486VA provided a cost estimate of 327 million over 10 years for1487Section 2 of the bill, which eliminates the remarriage penalty1488for DIC. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) had a wildly1489different estimate stating that it would cost around $21490billion. Is VA willing to provide the numbers it utilized to1491determine its score and work with CBO to provide a more1492accurate estimate?1493    Ms. Bover. The VA is always happy to work with the1494committee on this topic. We do not have a cost estimate at this1495time, but we are happy to get that for you when it is1496available.1497    Ms. Morrison. That would be great. You would commit to1498following up with my team on those numbers?1499    Ms. Bover. The Department commits to transparently sharing1500the information that we have as soon as we can.1501    Ms. Morrison. Thank you. VA's testimony states that1502Disability and Indemnity Compensation payments are designated1503for individuals who have lost financial support due to a1504spouse's service-related disability or death. It also states1505that if the surviving spouse remarries before age 55, this1506financial need is no longer considered to exist, thereby1507altering the initial intent of the law.1508    Ma'am, what changes at the age of 55 for a survivor to1509suddenly need this financial support? How is the situation1510different from someone who is, say, 32 or 52?1511    Ms. Bover. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify our1512position. The previous administration, you know, there is been1513a change in administration, and after reviewing the1514legislation, we have recognized that there are different1515complexities this may impose on surviving spouses for the1516benefits, both within the VA and in other areas of Federal1517agencies. The remarriage restrictions are not unique to VA.1518    Ms. Morrison. Leaving aside the financial need and earning1519potential, we are also talking about people who suffered1520unimaginable loss. Right? This is about following through on1521the promise we made to our servicemembers, veterans, and their1522families. We owe survivor benefits to men and women who have1523tragically lost their loved ones in service to their country.1524It is not right that we take them away if they find love again1525too soon.1526    Ms. Bover, beyond the economic factors, do you think there1527is a moral imperative to protect survivor benefits for those1528who remarry before age 55?1529    Ms. Bover. VA supports survivors getting remarried. When we1530reviewed this legislation what we found was it created1531inequities not only within our own programs within VA, but also1532across other Federal agencies. I think it is important to know1533that I myself am a veteran and the VA supports taking care of1534survivors and their families. I have been in this role about 31535months, and just in those 3 months I have made an effort to1536understand the issues that face survivors. I have set up1537meetings with the Offices of Survivors Assistance, the Tragedy1538Assistance Program. Just since this fiscal year, we have1539decreased the inventory of DIC claims by 34 percent and our1540average days pending by 40 percent.1541    We are making survivors a focus. With this legislation, we1542would be happy to work with the committee to address this more1543holistically while considering these secondary effects this1544legislation would have if enacted.1545    Ms. Morrison. One final question. In previous testimony, VA1546supported the Love Lives On Act with amendments. This Congress1547the bill was amended to include some technical fixes identified1548by VA in 2024. What has changed for VA to go from supporting1549the removal of remarriage restriction requirements for1550surviving spouses to now opposing the bill outright?1551    Ms. Bover. With the change in administration, again, after1552we reviewed the legislation, we found that there would be some1553inequities caused within some of our own survivor programs1554within the VA and also across other Federal agencies. For1555example, survivor's pension, if a survivor remarries at any1556age, they lose that benefit. It also affects other Federal1557agencies, such as TRICARE, the Survivor Benefit Plan, Social1558Security. Those remarriage restrictions are not unique to the1559VA.1560    Ms. Morrison. It is disappointing to me. In spite of our1561disagreement, I do hope that we can work together, find a path1562forward, because I believe we owe it to survivors and their1563families to get this done. Thank you.1564    Mr. Chair, with that, I yield back.1565    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you.1566    Ms. Bover, you answered Dr. Morrison's two questions with1567the exact same answer, which means I think you are either1568reading it, or you had that memorized before you walked in. You1569say as far as Love Lives On, it is not unique just to the VA1570and that other Federal agencies are touched. I want you to1571expand on that for me.1572    Ms. Bover. Absolutely. Our Survivor's Pension Program has1573remarriage restrictions as well, so if a survivor in our1574pension program remarries, they face----1575    Mr. Luttrell. I am aware of that. That is what we are--that1576is what we will be changing. When you say ``other Federal1577agencies.''1578    Ms. Bover. Absolutely. Other Federal agencies, Social1579Security Administration has a Remarriage Restriction Act,1580Survivor Benefits Plan has a Remarriage Restriction Act,1581TRICARE has a remarriage restriction. Many other----1582    Mr. Luttrell. What do you mean TRICARE has a--explain.1583    Ms. Bover. Absolutely. With TRICARE, if a survivor1584remarries at any age, they lose that benefit.1585    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. Social Security, they lose that1586benefit. That is what you are telling me?1587    Ms. Bover. For Social Security, if the survivor remarries1588after the age of 60, they lose that benefit.1589    Mr. Luttrell. Because other Federal agencies, Social1590Security and TRICARE, have this legislative requirement, the VA1591as a whole is stating that it will not support a young lady or1592a young man remarrying under the age of 55 and keep their1593benefits because other Federal agencies have that legislation1594or have that regulatory clause?1595    Ms. Bover. VA definitely supports survivors remarrying at1596any age.1597    Mr. Luttrell. No, that is not what I am asking. That is not1598what I am asking at all, because we want the age to be under159955. From what I understand from the VA's testimony is because1600other Federal agencies, because it is not unique to the VA, it1601seems like you are playing a chess game with me. The VA is1602going to use that Social Security and TRICARE to get out of1603this.1604    Ms. Bover. Even within our own Department, again, with the1605Survivor's Pension Program, it would cause an inequity. Then1606also with our Home Loan Guarantee Program, it would also cause1607an inequity within our own Department.1608    Mr. Luttrell. Explain. Explain.1609    Ms. Bover. The Survivor's Pension Program, if a survivor1610remarries at any age, they would lose entitlement to that1611benefit. Then there is also a remarriage restriction on home1612Loan Guarantee. They would not be eligible for that VA-backed1613loan for that benefit----1614    Mr. Luttrell. If we go under the age of 55, they would be1615eligible.1616    Ms. Bover. This particular bill only addresses--does not1617address those other instances of benefits within our program.1618    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. Why did you bring it up?1619    Ms. Bover. We need the bill to holistically consider the1620impacts of other benefits within our own Department.1621    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. If we add all that in there, the VA1622would be okay with us taking the age of 55 away?1623    Ms. Bover. The VA is definitely willing to work with the1624committee.1625    Mr. Luttrell. Then why did not the VA come to the committee1626and say, hey, this is the best way forward instead of waiting1627until now? Here is the issue that I have. It seems like the VA1628is using its latitudes to say because other Federal agencies do1629not have the same opportunity that we do or have the same1630opportunity that we do, we are not going to change this piece1631of legislation. I do not care about everybody else because I am1632the chairman of this committee, and my sole responsibility is1633taking care of the veterans and the veterans' spouses. The VA1634is trying to sidestep this landmine, saying that we are not1635going to do that. You are throwing all this political BS at me1636that you are digging up God knows where, thinking that I am1637going to be okay with it. I can assure you, ma'am, I am not.1638    In conversation with you from this point forward, I want to1639know why the VA--because you will not use other Federal1640agencies, and it is not unique to the VA. It is the VA. The1641reason that we sit in here today and the country exists is1642because of our veterans and their loved ones. I want a great1643explanation of why you are not going to do this.1644    Ms. Bover. The VA supports veterans and survivors and their1645families passionately.1646    Mr. Luttrell. I know, yes, ma'am. You said that. You said1647that many times.1648    Ms. Bover. Even within our own Department, it would cause--1649--1650    Mr. Luttrell. Also, Ms. Bover, you are a veteran, and I1651probably would guess that you probably agree with me, but1652because of the role and responsibility you have inside the VA,1653you cannot. That is sad. Please continue.1654    Ms. Bover. Even within our own department, it would cause1655inequities. We are happy to work with the committee.1656    Mr. Luttrell. Like, give me a dollar sign on that.1657    Ms. Bover. I am sorry, sir?1658    Mr. Luttrell. Give me a dollar sign on that. It is all1659about money. At the end of the day, you break it down to the1660lowest common denominator, we are talking about dollar bills. I1661have to look all the constituents in the face and all the1662spouses that lost their loved ones like, hey, you are not worth1663it. You are going to have to convince me that I need to do1664that.1665    Ms. Bover. We do not have a cost estimate at this time, but1666we would be happy to get that for you.1667    Mr. Luttrell. Over the last Congress, which this thing1668showed up to this Congress in the second year, the VA does not1669have a cost estimate on this. How is that even possible?1670    Ms. Bover. We would be happy to get you that information,1671sir, as soon as we can.1672    Mr. Luttrell. Is that going to be coming from you or is1673there a secretary I need to talk to?1674    Ms. Bover. The VA is committed to transparency, and as soon1675as they have that information, they will get it to you.1676    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. You got 24 hours. Does that sound1677doable? I want all that information in 24 hours from the second1678that you guys walk out of here. Because if I do not tell you to1679do that, I will not get it till next year and, unfortunately, I1680will not be here. You got 24 hours. Or you could call the1681Secretary and have him call me directly. Okay?1682    Ms. Bover. The VA will get you the information as soon as1683they can.1684    Mr. Luttrell. I gave you 24 hours, period. I am going to1685keep going, Doc, unless, Ms. Morrison, you got anything you1686want to jump on? Okay. I am going to keep going.1687    Mr. Powers, how does the VA plan to manage the comfort of1688VA hospital patients who will now see grave sites from their1689hospital window if VA moves forward with existing expansion1690plan? Mr. Powers? Turn the microphone on, sir.1691    Mr. Powers. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman. We1692have over 20 national cemeteries that are located--co-located1693with VA medical centers. It is a historical--in most cases, it1694is a historical element that goes back to the 18--the 19th1695century, after the Civil War.1696    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. Keep going.1697    Mr. Powers. We do not feel that that is an issue. Those1698cemeteries started almost at the same time that those1699facilities started, particularly in the case of Dayton. They1700both started, I think, in 1867. As soon as the Civil War1701veterans passed away----1702    Mr. Luttrell. Is the VA planning on moving cemeteries away1703from our VA hospitals? I guess is a better way to ask you that1704question.1705    Mr. Powers. No. No, we are not.1706    Mr. Luttrell. They are going to keep them right there on1707the same spot?1708    Mr. Powers. It is--historically, it is been no issue for us1709to have our national cemeteries co-located with the medical1710centers or the--what preceded the medical centers, which were1711disabled soldiers homes for Civil War veterans and veterans of1712other conflicts.1713    Mr. Luttrell. We are running out of space for our1714cemeteries though, are not we? As far as location in the1715hospitals.1716    Mr. Powers. We proactively, National Cemetery1717Administration, look at our burial depletion data. We have1718policies to make sure that we are expanding and replacing1719cemeteries where necessary and going through the criteria to1720determine how to get more land so that we can continue to serve1721veterans the way we do throughout the country.1722    Mr. Luttrell. Let us shift gears to, let us see here, how1723does the VA currently collect and use data related to national1724cemetery operations? How would a public annual report change1725this process? How often does a report currently come out?1726    Mr. Powers. We do not issue, as has been--thank you for the1727question, Mr. Chairman. We do not issue a report right now, as1728has been pointed out. This bill would have us issue an annual1729report and we support the intent of the bill. It clearly does1730what is needed, what many people think is good government, the1731proposed topics which are benefits administration, customer1732satisfaction, cemetery maps, burial options, internment1733activity. That is data that we currently have almost in every1734aspect that the bill requires except one that we pointed out in1735the testimony is we would have to work on. We collect that1736data. We provided it to Congress when asked for, but we never1737did it in a annual report, so.1738    Mr. Luttrell. How long have you been at the Department of1739Veterans Affairs, sir?1740    Mr. Powers. I have been with--19 years.1741    Mr. Luttrell. In the same spot, something similar?1742    Mr. Powers. In the National Cemetery Administration for the1743entire 19 years, 15 years basically----1744    Mr. Luttrell. Would it be more beneficial for an annual1745report to come out or----1746    Mr. Powers. Oh, we support it. We support the intent. There1747is just one slight thing in the bill that we said we would have1748a problem disaggregating along one minor part of the bill. We1749support the intent of this bill for the reason stated in the1750bill.1751    Mr. Luttrell. Are we for or against the FRAUD in VA1752Disability Exams Act, Mr. Smith?1753    Mr. Smith. Thank you for that question. The way that it is1754written, it really is duplication of efforts that we currently1755have in place, sir. It also uses language that would1756potentially confuse veterans. Where it specifically says that1757we would be required to notify veterans when DBQs are suspected1758of fraudulent activity is problematic. Just because there is a1759possibility that a DBQ would be fraudulent does not necessarily1760mean that it is, so.1761    Mr. Luttrell. Explain to me when you say fraudulent DBQ.1762    Mr. Smith. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question.1763    Mr. Luttrell. Kind of walk me through how we have come to1764that.1765    Mr. Smith. This is specifically for public facing DBQs, so1766those that are on the web that can be downloaded. Through1767research, we have determined that there are telltale signs that1768a DBQ could potentially be fraudulent, such as you could see1769where the DBQ may have been altered or the information that is1770required in the signature block is missing or the examiner's1771address is, say, greater than 100 miles away from where the1772veteran lives. Looking at those potential signs that a DBQ1773could be fraudulent----1774    Mr. Luttrell. Is there a language model inside of our1775computational system that picks this up or is this a still1776human touching this?1777    Mr. Smith. That is a great question. We have developed a1778Power BI tool that should be ready this year that is going to1779be able to analyze a little over a million DBQs, public facing1780DBQs that have been scanned going all the way back to 2010, so1781we have a repository. When public DBQs come in, those are1782scanned and there should be a tool that is available this year1783that will allow us to, with greater fidelity, to be able to1784quickly identify potential problem cases.1785    Mr. Luttrell. Then this particular legislation, it seems to1786me, would make sense if we had that capability?1787    Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.1788    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. We are just--as far as technology goes,1789we are not there for implementation of this?1790    Mr. Smith. We should----1791    Mr. Luttrell. That makes sense. I can have that1792conversation with the committee if you are supporting what I1793just said.1794    Mr. Smith. I believe that I am supporting what you just1795said unless my colleague kicks me under the table. I think that1796the electronic piece should be available in 2026, so in this1797fiscal year.1798    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. This showed up for a reason. Amplifying1799information will always help us navigate these waters.1800    Mr. Smith. I think, and I am not sure how wires may have1801gotten crossed, but VA has been proactive in this space. We1802recognize that there are some problem players out there. We1803have developed training that the claims processors are required1804to take so that they can understand their responsibility to1805potentially identify fraudulent DBQs as well as a defined1806process for them to report suspected fraudulent DBQs up. As an1807organization, we work with the Office of Inspector General if1808we run into issues or cases where we feel that there is some1809type of impairment investigation required.1810    Mr. Luttrell. Let us talk about H.R. 5339 for a second. I1811was unaware that servicemembers in the Pentagon did not fall1812underneath the PACT Act. Explain to me how that happened.1813    Mr. Smith. I appreciate that question. I cannot explain how1814that location was overlooked or that group was overlooked. With1815the respect to how this rule is written, our issue with it is1816that the conditions are listed in a manner that is too broad.1817All we are asking----1818    Mr. Luttrell. Please say more.1819    Mr. Smith. For instance, cancers of any type or cancers of,1820I do not know, neck, something of that nature, whereas we could1821be more specific with the conditions that could potentially1822have been caused by whatever toxics may have been present in1823that space. As an organization, we support identifying those1824exposures and making sure that we taking care of veterans.1825However, there needs to be more research in this particular1826area so we could determine if there is causation.1827    Mr. Luttrell. The PACT Act covers or explains that very1828well----1829    Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.1830    Mr. Luttrell [continuing]. I thought.1831    Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.1832    Mr. Luttrell. As far as types of--not to go down a rabbit1833hole here, but if we are going to try to unpack this suitcase,1834I do not think anybody can, as far as research goes, I do not1835think anybody can put their finger on exactly what chemical1836combinations create what cancers in anybody, especially if you1837are after an attack of such magnitude. This is total1838truthfulness. I had no idea that they were not included until a1839week ago when this was brought to my attention.1840    Mr. Smith. I would be honest and say that I was not aware1841either, sir. In preparing for--and I hope it is okay to be1842honest. In preparing for this hearing, you know, do my due1843diligence and reached out to our partners in VHA, who identify1844the cohorts of veterans and they track them and do the1845research, but this particular cohort has not been defined.1846Again----1847    Mr. Luttrell. Who is responsible for that?1848    Mr. Smith. It falls under VHA, but there is an office VHA1849Home Health Outcomes, Medical Exposures. They are the research1850point that partners with VBA and the presumptive disability1851process.1852    Mr. Luttrell. Has this specific issue been brought to the1853VA's attention in the past?1854    Mr. Smith. Not to my knowledge, sir. No, sir.1855    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. I expect movement on this one. This is1856absolutely ridiculous, first and foremost. As far as the global1857war and terror, they were the first ones to feel it short of1858the towers falling, I mean. For them to not be included, that1859makes--it sounds like we are on the same page, though.1860    Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.1861    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. Ms. Bover, are you for or against the1862PRESUME Act?1863    Ms. Bover. That is under the oversight of Mr. James Smith,1864so I am going to pass it to my colleague.1865    Mr. Luttrell. Okay.1866    Mr. Smith. With the--I guess this is written down. No, we1867cannot support that. For the presumptive disabilities, dose1868requirement is--dose is not required for us to grant service1869connection as long as there are two criteria that are met. One1870is that the servicemember participated in a radiation risk1871activity and, two, that they be diagnosed with a condition that1872is listed in 3.309 or the presumptive conditions that were part1873of the PACT Act.1874    Mr. Luttrell. Okay. This particular group that Ms. Titus1875was speaking about specifically, how do we, because of the VA1876regulations, how do we fix this problem? You cannot argue that1877this happened and that they were there. I understand1878classification levels and everything that happens in between.1879What is the best way to fix this from VA's perspective?1880    Mr. Smith. I appreciate that question, sir. I am not a1881clinician, I am not a researcher speaking to counterparts at1882VHA. There is been research looked at this area and, again, I1883cannot speak to the research in and of itself. However, in1884partnership with U.S. Department of War Subject Matter Experts1885(DOW SME), there is no way for them to--or there is not been1886definitive evidence, I am just reading now, ``no definitive1887evidence of health problems as a result of radiation1888exposure.'' I asked someone to send me that report, but I think1889that is the issue is that as it stands, they have looked at1890this area, but, for whatever reason, they have not been able to1891determine causation.1892    Mr. Luttrell. If there is a report that you find, would you1893send that over to committee staff so we can see it, too,1894please?1895    Mr. Smith. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.1896    Mr. Luttrell. I thank the Department of Veterans Affairs1897for your time today. I appreciate it. As far as this1898legislation goes, I think that we are--I think we disagree with1899each other. It is a shame it has to happen in this hearing,1900which I--you know, if we could have had a roundtable1901discussion, you could have come to my office and reached out to1902the committee and said, hey, we would like to sit down and1903discuss this with you before you show up. I think we could--it1904would have been a lot more productive instead of me being on1905send and you on receive.1906    At the end of the day, it is you. It is not me. You touch1907the veterans, you do. Thank you all for your service. I can1908wire brush you all day long, yell and scream and ask you, and I1909do not sit up here and just throw this at you. These are1910conversations I have with those who put me here. It is my job1911to do that, period. When we walk out of here, you can either1912forget the fact that I asked you to do what I asked you to do,1913in 24 hours you are going to have that report for me. I will be1914calling you tomorrow asking for that report. You are going to1915give me the same answer I have gotten since the 3 years and 21916months I have been here. Then I am going to go home and tell1917the veterans exactly what you told me. That is a damn shame.1918Okay?1919    Veterans should not be caught up in the political1920bureaucracies of this place, period, and their loved ones.1921Thank you for your time.1922    I ask unanimous consent that all members have 5 legislative1923days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous1924material. Hearing no objection, so ordered.1925    This meeting is adjourned.1926    [Whereupon, at 12:47 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]1927=======================================================================19281929                         A  P  P  E  N  D  I  X19301931=======================================================================19321933                    Prepared Statements of Witnesses19341935                              ----------19361937                 Prepared Statement of James McCormick19381939    Chairman, Ranking Member, Members of the Committee. Thank you for1940the opportunity to appear before you today.1941    My name is James L. McCormick II.1942    I am the Executive Director of Government Affairs for Vietnam1943Veterans of America (VVA). I am a retired captain with 22 years of1944service in the United States Army. That included 16-years as enlisted1945in the NCO ranks, which then led to my direct commission as a combat1946arms officer where I spent the last 6 years of my service in the1947officer ranks.1948    I served during the Cold war, the Gulf War, and Operation Iraqi1949Freedom.1950    Vietnam Veterans of America was founded on the shared resolve of1951veterans who returned from a very real war to a country unprepared, or1952sometimes unwilling, to understand the cost of that service.1953    Formed in 1978, the congressionally chartered organization grew out1954of Vietnam veterans working together, often unofficially and without1955institutional support, to demand recognition, including for those1956invisible wounds of war that would later, because of their fighting for1957it, become formally recognized as post-traumatic stress disorder1958(PTSD).1959    Guided by our principle that, ``Never again will one generation of1960veterans abandon another,'' VVA has evolved from advocating for Vietnam1961veterans alone to standing for all veterans and their families. We1962strive to ensure that as Vietnam veterans age they receive the1963healthcare, long-term support, disability and survivor benefits, and1964dignity they have earned... while also fighting just as fiercely to1965protect future generations from being ignored, misunderstood, or left1966to fight alone.1967    The nine items we've been asked to address largely align with VVA's1968advocacy; and would likely endorse most while monitoring implementation1969to avoid administrative pitfalls or unintended restrictions.1970    H.R. 1685--Justice for ALS Veterans Act of 2025: VVA would strongly1971support this bill. It addresses a clear inequity for surviving spouses1972of veterans who die from service-connected ALS, a condition often1973progressing rapidly and linked to exposures (relevant to Vietnam1974veterans via Agent Orange or other hazards). Deeming total disability1975for the full 8-year DIC enhancement period prevents unfair denials due1976to disease timeline. The reporting requirement on other short-life-1977expectancy conditions promotes broader equity and oversight--aligning1978with VVA's push for presumptive and survivor benefits. Minimal VA1979burden makes it practical. The noted condition about shifting from 901980to 120 days active duty appears to be a mis-reference (bill focuses on1981DIC rating, not presumption threshold), but VVA would likely back1982mitigations for edge cases.19831984    H.R. 2164--Dayton National Cemetery Expansion Act of 2025: VVA1985would support this targeted expansion. Ensuring burial capacity in1986regions like Dayton prevents future access restrictions for veterans1987and families. Accepting no-cost land transfer with clear timelines1988advances NCA goals without new cemetery creation. VVA emphasizes1989dignified burial access; this addresses a regional constraint1990efficiently. Risks like timeline delays for reviews are valid watch1991items, but the bill's direction to VA helps move it forward.19921993    H.R. 1004--Love Lives On Act of 2025: VVA would strongly support1994this. Eliminating the remarriage penalty for DIC, survivor pensions,1995SBP, and TRICARE modernizes outdated rules that penalize surviving1996spouses (often widows) for remarrying, especially after age 55 or if1997later marriages end. This improves financial/health stability and1998reflects contemporary realities. Retroactive elements and age1999provisions help many. VVA has long advocated for survivor equity; this2000reduces hardship without major drawbacks beyond potential costs (which2001VVA would argue are justified). Guidance clarity is a key watch item.20022003    H.R. 6698--BVA Annual Report Transparency Act of 2025: VVA would2004support this. Enhanced BVA reporting on delays, remands (distinguishing2005legacy/AMA systems), causes, and mitigation plans boosts accountability2006and identifies root issues (e.g., training, quality). VVA frequently2007calls for appeals reform and transparency to reduce backlogs/delays2008affecting veterans. Indirect benefits through pressure for improvements2009align with priorities. Added workload is a risk, but paired with2010resources, it could drive real change.20112012    H.R. 4469--PRESUME Act: VVA would strongly support this. Removing2013dose-proof requirements for radiation-exposed veterans aligns with2014presumptive frameworks VVA champions (e.g., Agent Orange, burn pits).2015Many Vietnam-era veterans faced radiation risks; easing evidentiary2016barriers reduces unfair denials from incomplete records. It simplifies2017adjudication while potentially increasing grants--consistent with VVA's2018toxic exposure advocacy. Watch for clear verification standards to2019maintain integrity.2020    H.R. 5723--Fraud Reduction And Uncovering Deception (FRAUD) in VA2021Disability Exams Act: VVA would support this. Stronger oversight of2022contractors via audits, fraud identification (especially DBQs),2023reporting, and tracking targets bad actors/claim mills without broadly2024reopening decisions absent criminal conviction. This protects program2025integrity and veterans from predatory practices. VVA emphasizes2026contractor accountability; safeguards against delays/false positives on2027legitimate claims are essential watch items.20282029    H.R. 5339--Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness Act: VVA2030would support this presumption for Pentagon responders on/after 9/11.2031Broad disease list (respiratory, cancers, etc.) tied to documented2032hazards eases nexus proof for an identifiable group. While site-2033specific, it promotes equity for post-9/11 exposures; VVA supports2034similar presumptions. Cohort verification and outreach are important to2035avoid burdens.20362037    H.R. 6943--Veterans Burial Allowance and Reimbursement Act of 2026:2038VVA would cautiously support, pending details. Standardizing/2039consolidating burial authorities (including service-connected deaths)2040could simplify processing and reduce confusion. VVA values clear,2041uniform benefits for families. However, repeals/amendments risk2042unintended narrowing; VVA would watch for side-by-side comparisons2043ensuring no eligibility/benefit losses during transition.20442045    Discussion Draft--National Cemetery Administration Annual Report2046Act of 2026: VVA would support this. Detailed annual NCA reporting2047(interments disaggregated, satisfaction, maps, options, memorials)2048enhances transparency and oversight of burial access/program2049performance. Indirectly benefits veterans/families by informing2050improvements and accountability. Aligns with VVA's interest in2051dignified, accessible burials nationwide.2052    I commend the subcommittee for the work it is doing. Helping2053veterans get the benefits they deserve is noble and required of our2054government. Too often, it seems that negativity and party-line politics2055have seeped into veteran policy in ways that create competition instead2056of compassion, delay instead of care, and noise instead of solutions.2057We debate labels, eras of service, and party positions while veterans2058struggle with housing, healthcare, suicide risk, financial insecurity,2059and dignity at the end of life.2060    It does not matter what branch they served in. It does not matter2061when they served. And it does not matter whether they faced combat,2062supported supply lines, maintained equipment, gathered intelligence, or2063served in an administrative role. Every one of them raised their right2064hand and accepted the same obligation. Every one of them made2065sacrifices that shaped their lives, their families, and this Nation.2066    But advocacy must never devolve into deciding which veterans are2067most politically convenient to support. The role of Congress is to2068ensure that every veteran, and every veteran's family, area not2069hampered by their service, and can live with stability, access care2070without unnecessary barriers, and age with dignity.2071    Thank you. I look forward to your questions now or at any time.20722073                   Prepared Statement of Paul Shipley2074[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]20752076               Prepared Statement of Tanya Wilson-Thomas2077[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]20782079                  Prepared Statement of Nancy Springer20802081    Chairman Luttrell, Ranking Member McGarvey, and members of the2082subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign2083Wars of the United States (VFW) and its Auxiliary, I would like to2084thank you for the opportunity to speak on these subjects.20852086H.R. 1004, Love Lives On Act of 202520872088    As a resolutions-based Veterans Service Organization, the VFW does2089not have a position on whether survivors should retain their benefits2090upon remarriage. However, the VFW supports restoring TRICARE2091eligibility for surviving spouses who remarry and whose subsequent2092marriage later ends. Under current law, a surviving spouse in this2093circumstance may apply to have Dependency and Indemnity Compensation2094(DIC) and Survivor Benefit Plan payments reinstated. To ensure parity2095across survivor benefits, legislation should also reinstate TRICARE2096coverage when a surviving spouse's subsequent marriage ends.20972098H.R. 1685, Justice for ALS Veterans Act of 202520992100    The VFW supports this legislation to extend the enhanced DIC paid2101to surviving spouses of veterans who die from amyotrophic lateral2102sclerosis (ALS) regardless of the length of time the veteran lived2103after diagnosis. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA),2104veterans are approximately 1.5 times more likely to develop ALS than2105individuals who did not serve in the military. VA presumes ALS is2106service-connected and assigns a 100 percent disability rating due to2107its severe and progressive nature. VA pays surviving spouses DIC and an2108additional monthly allowance if the spouse was married to the veteran2109for at least 8 years and VA rated the veteran totally disabled due to2110ALS for a minimum of 8 years.2111    However, ALS is a rapidly progressive and terminal disease, with a2112typical life expectancy of only three to 5 years following diagnosis,2113making the 8-year disability requirement unattainable for many2114families. This legislation would remove that unrealistic requirement2115while preserving the 8-year marriage rule, ensuring more surviving2116spouses receive the full benefits available for survivors of veterans2117who die from ALS.2118    VFW member and ALS patient Major Chris Mulholland, United States2119Marine Corps (Retired), spearheaded the VFW's long-standing advocacy to2120reform ALS survivor benefits, including leading the VFW's adoption of a2121resolution on this issue. Major Mulholland personally experienced the2122relentless progression of this debilitating and terminal illness. He2123spoke out not only about the disproportionate impact of ALS on2124veterans, but also about the profound toll it takes on families, who2125shoulder intense caregiving responsibilities and face financial2126uncertainty while coping with rapid decline and loss. Tragically, Major2127Mulholland's own life reflected the very injustice this bill seeks to2128address, as he lived fewer than 8 years following his ALS diagnosis in21292020.2130    The VFW also supports the provision that would require VA to submit2131a report identifying other service-connected disabilities with high2132mortality rates that warrant similar treatment.21332134H.R. 2164, Dayton National Cemetery Expansion Act of 202521352136    Although this legislation addresses a specific circumstance in2137Ohio, the VFW supports both this legislation and the broader principle2138of expanding VA-administered cemeteries whenever feasible. In this2139instance, it authorizes VA to enter into an agreement with a local bank2140to acquire a 58-acre parcel adjacent to Dayton National Cemetery. This2141land transfer would create additional burial capacity for veterans and2142eligible family members, which is particularly important given the2143limited availability of other VA-managed cemeteries in the region.2144    In 2018, the median age of the Nation's approximately 18 million2145veterans was 65, while the median age of the 6.4 million Vietnam-era2146veterans was 71. Taken together, these demographics underscore the2147urgency of proactive planning. Accordingly, the VFW urges VA to develop2148and implement a comprehensive, forward-looking national cemetery land2149acquisition strategy to ensure it can continue to honor the final2150wishes of these large and aging veteran populations.21512152H.R. 4469, Providing Radiation Exposed Servicemembers Undisputed2153Medical Eligibility (PRESUME) Act21542155    The VFW supports this legislation to eliminate the requirement for2156a specific radiation dose to determine whether a veteran qualifies as2157radiation exposed. Currently, to qualify for a presumption of service2158connection due to radiation exposure, the veteran must provide proof of2159on-site participation in a radiation-risk activity and radiation dose2160estimates from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.2161    This legislation would streamline this process by eliminating the2162dosage requirement and aligning the process more closely with that used2163for radiation-affected civilian personnel. Diseases attributable to2164radiation exposure may manifest several years after exposure,2165exacerbating the difficulty of obtaining an accurate dosage reading.2166Also, both service members and civilian employees worked many times in2167the same radiation-affected areas, yet programs for civilian employees2168do not require dose assessments to establish exposure. This discrepancy2169creates the appearance of unequal treatment.21702171H.R. 5339, Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness Act21722173    The VFW supports this legislation to establish a presumption of2174service connection for specific diseases associated with exposure to2175toxins attributable to the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon. This attack may2176have exposed individuals to toxins that cause various respiratory,2177cardiovascular, and cancer-related conditions. Because current law2178excludes this cohort from the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson2179Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 20222180(Public Law 117-168) and other benefits programs, this legislation2181would streamline the disability compensation claims process and close a2182long-standing coverage gap.21832184H.R. 5723, Fraud Reduction And Uncovering Deception (FRAUD) in VA2185Disability Exams Act21862187    The VFW supports this legislation to require VA to identify and2188report instances of fraud with respect to VA Disability Benefits2189Questionnaire (DBQ) forms. Since DBQs provide foundational evidence for2190many VA disability compensation claims, they must accurately reflect a2191veteran's injury or illness to preserve the integrity of the claims2192process.2193    Veterans use public DBQs, available on VA's publicly accessible2194website, to collect clinical information from their health care2195providers to assist VA in evaluating disability compensation claims. VA2196organizes these commonly used forms by body systems as characterized in2197the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities. Because DBQs often play a2198decisive role in claims outcomes, fraudulent schemes have emerged to2199exploit their use. In some cases, bad actors charge veterans for2200assistance that VA and VA-accredited representatives provide at no2201cost. These actors may also falsely promise access to private health2202care providers who will secure higher ratings, improperly advise2203veterans to avoid VA examinations, or claim they can guarantee2204favorable outcomes. Some affiliated health care providers charge fees2205while offering to manufacture diagnoses or exaggerate existing2206conditions for the DBQs to obtain benefits beyond what the evidence2207supports.2208    This legislation would require VA to establish a formal process for2209claimants and claims processors to identify and report suspected DBQ-2210related fraud. VA would refer these cases to appropriate authorities2211while also implementing a recurring audit program to monitor both2212reported and detected fraudulent activity. Together, these measures2213would create a systematic approach to reporting, evaluating, and2214prosecuting DBQ-related fraud, which is an approach that does not2215currently exist.2216    The VFW also supports the legislation's reporting requirements to2217ensure that VA regularly informs the appropriate congressional2218committees of the program's effectiveness.22192220H.R. 6698, Board of Veterans Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of2221202522222223    The VFW supports this legislation to require the Board of Veterans'2224Appeals (BVA) to include in its annual report an identification of the2225factors contributing to untimely disposition and remand of appeals. In2226its Fiscal Year 2024 annual report, BVA reported an appeals inventory2227of approximately 200,000 cases and projected an additional 100,000 new2228appeals in Fiscal Year 2025. As a result, veterans may wait up to 22229years for a decision, depending on the docket, with significantly2230longer delays for appellants who request a hearing.2231    Remands from BVA to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction further2232delay appeal resolution. In Fiscal Year 2024, BVA remanded more than 402233percent of appeals. Because remands occur for a variety of reasons, the2234time required for a claim to return to BVA if necessary varies widely,2235making it difficult to predict when BVA will issue a final decision.2236Although returned appeals retain their original place on the docket,2237the remand process still prolongs the overall appeals timeline.2238Requiring BVA to identify the factors driving delays in appeals and2239remands would improve transparency, and provide data BVA could use to2240evaluate and strengthen its processes and procedures.22412242Discussion Draft, Veterans Burial Allowance and Reimbursement Act of2243202622442245    The VFW supports this proposal to standardize the payment of burial2246and funeral expenses, and plot allowances for deceased veterans.2247Currently, burial benefits vary based on many factors such as the2248veteran's date of death, the manner or location of interment, or2249whether a service-connected condition caused the death. Also, statutory2250provisions governing plot allowances and burial or interment2251eligibility remain scattered throughout the United States Code or lack2252a consistent, unified framework. This proposal would consolidate and2253clarify existing statutes to ensure VA treats similarly situated2254veterans and their survivors consistently and equitably.22552256Discussion Draft, National Cemetery Administration Annual Report Act of2257202622582259    The VFW supports this legislation that would require VA to submit2260an annual National Cemetery Administration (NCA) report to Congress.2261Currently, VA's performance and financial reports to Congress include2262NCA data and information. A separate report exclusively focused on NCA2263would increase transparency of its operations, enable better oversight,2264inform budgeting and strategic planning for veteran burial benefits,2265and highlight shortfalls or challenges that need a legislative2266solution.2267    The VFW would support a well-written, informative report that would2268enhance NCA services and ensure veteran burial benefits despite2269dwindling resources. The proposed report would include a variety of2270cemetery-related data markers that VA could use to analyze cemetery2271operations, and either support reforms or continue best practices.2272    Chairman Luttrell and Ranking Member McGarvey, this concludes my2273testimony. I am prepared to answer any questions you or the members of2274the subcommittee may have.22752276Information Required by Rule XI2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives22772278Pursuant to Rule XI2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives, the VFW has2279not received any Federal grants in Fiscal Year 2026, nor has it2280received any Federal grants in the two previous Fiscal Years.22812282The VFW has not received payments or contracts from any foreign2283governments in the current year or preceding two calendar years.22842285                  Prepared Statement of Jennifer Bover22862287    Chairman Luttrell, Ranking Member McGarvey, and other Members of2288the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting us here today to present our2289views on several bills that would affect VA programs and services.2290Joining me today is Mr. Glenn Powers, Deputy Under Secretary for Field2291Programs and Cemetery Operations, National Cemetery Administration, and2292Mr. James Smith, Deputy Executive Director, Compensation Service,2293Veterans Benefits Administration. I appreciate the opportunity to2294discuss the important pieces of legislation affecting Veterans pending2295before this Subcommittee.22962297H.R. 1685  Justice for ALS Veterans Act of 202522982299    Section 2 of this bill amends 38 U.S.C. Sec.  1311 to ensure that2300surviving spouses of Veterans who die from ALS receive the increased2301Dependency and Indemnity Compensation under Sec.  1311(a)(2), commonly2302called the `eight and eight' kicker, regardless of how long the Veteran2303had the disease. Currently, this additional benefit applies only when2304the Veteran was totally disabled for 8 years prior to death and married2305for that same period. The bill removes that 8-year requirement for ALS2306cases but keeps the length of marriage requirement. It also applies to2307deaths on or after October 1, 2025, and directs VA to report on other2308high-mortality conditions.23092310    VA supports the intent to provide this benefit to ALS-affected2311families.23122313    We also support the goal of Section 3 to review other rapidly2314progressive diseases, like cancer or Parkinson's, but note the bill2315lacks criteria for defining ``high mortality rate.'' Clear standards2316are needed to ensure consistent implementation with congressional2317intent.23182319    Position: VA supports the intent of this bill if amended, however,2320VA is unable to assess the impact to budgetary resources and therefore2321will follow up with the committee once this evaluation is complete or2322the Congressional Budget Office has provided a score.23232324H.R. 2164  Dayton National Cemetery Expansion Act of 202523252326    This bill would require VA to enter into an agreement with the2327Montgomery County Land Bank to acquire land near Dayton National2328Cemetery for future expansion. VA does not support this bill.2329    VA has an established policy on expansion processes in National2330Cemetery Administration (NCA) Directive 3001. This directive provides2331statutory references, establishes mandatory policy for the2332establishment, expansion, and replacement of VA national cemeteries, as2333well as detailed decision criteria for expanding, replacing, or closing2334an existing national cemetery.2335    NCA monitors the rates at which each cemetery will deplete capacity2336for each type of burial it provides. Current projections show that2337Dayton National Cemetery has sufficient burial space until at least23382050, and NCA and the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) are already2339exploring transfer of excess and unneeded land from the co-located2340medical center, which is VA's preferred and standard approach.2341    The bill raises several other concerns as well. It mandates VA to2342accept land even if we have no need for it, and without time limits on2343acquisition. Although the transfer is described as ``no cost,'' VA2344would bear significant potential expenses to clear structures,2345remediate hazards, and maintain the property. The land also includes2346occupied homes, raising the risk of displacing families and creating2347the impression VA endorses that outcome.2348    VA remains committed to using existing property to meet burial2349needs before pursuing new acquisitions.23502351    Position: VA does not support this bill.23522353    H.R. 1004  Love Lives On Act of 202523542355    Section 2 of this bill would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec.  103(d) by2356restructuring and expanding exceptions to the remarriage bar for2357Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) and Medal of Honor Pension.2358VA does not support removing remarriage restrictions for these2359benefits.2360    VA is sensitive to the intent behind this bill and is available to2361work with the Committee to pursue ways to better support surviving2362spouses, while accounting for secondary impacts across various benefit2363entitlements. Existing remarriage restrictions help manage and allocate2364VA resources effectively, ensuring that they are directed to2365individuals who have lost the financial support of a spouse due to that2366spouse's service-related disability or death. DIC payments are2367designated for individuals who have lost financial support due to a2368spouse's service-related disability or death. In regard to DIC2369benefits, if the surviving spouse remarries before the age of 55, this2370financial need is considered to no longer exist, thereby altering the2371initial intent of the law.2372    Furthermore, if enacted, this bill would create a greater disparity2373of survivor pension beneficiaries under Chapter 15 who will remain2374precluded from benefit entitlement if they remarry at any age.2375    The bill also creates a secondary impact. Under 38 U.S.C. Sec.23763701(b)(2), surviving spouses of Veterans who died from service-2377connected disabilities are eligible for VA home loan benefits.2378Currently, VA relies on DIC eligibility to determine home loan2379eligibility. The bill would break that link because proposed Sec.2380103(d)(5)(C) still bars home loan benefits if remarriage occurs before2381age 57. VA would need to separately verify remarriage status for home2382loan eligibility, adding complexity. Aligning DIC and home loan2383requirements would streamline this process.2384    Finally, VA also highlights an ambiguity created within this bill2385regarding Medal of Honor Pension under Sec.  1562. Section 2 removes2386application of certain provisions for DIC but retains them for Medal of2387Honor Pension, despite language aligning Sec. Sec.  1311 and 1562. If2388remarriage is not intended to bar entitlement under Sec.  1562, VA2389recommends removing that reference in Sec.  103(d)(5) or clarifying2390when remarriage applies. VA offers this clarification for accuracy,2391even though we oppose the bill.2392    We understand the Department of War has long opposed section 3 on2393the grounds of increased cost and inequity among surviving spouses.2394Furthermore, termination of a spousal annuity due to remarriage before2395a certain age is a standard feature of all Federal annuity programs2396(and civilian employers' pension programs). For that reason, it would2397be inequitable to further enhance the benefits for active-duty deaths2398while not allowing a similar option for the surviving spouses of2399retirees under other Federal programs such as the Federal Employee2400Retirement System, the Civil Service Retirement System, the Federal2401Railroad Retirement program, Social Security, and the Worker's2402Compensation Program survivor annuities.2403    VA defers to the Department of War on Section 4.24042405    Position: VA does not support this bill.24062407H.R. 6698  Board of Veterans Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of2408202524092410    This bill would amend the Board's annual reporting requirements2411under 38 U.S.C. Sec.  7101(d) to include reporting on factors2412contributing to untimely dispositions and remands. While the VA2413supports the intent, we have concerns that this requirement could harm2414Veterans by introducing delays, unnecessary costs, and confusion about2415docket choices--especially as appeal processing times are improving2416under the Appeals Modernization Act of 2017 (AMA). The AMA became2417effective in 2019 and introducing new reporting requirements at a time2418when VA is significantly decreasing adjudication times would divert2419resources and potentially stall current progress.2420    Section 2 of this bill would require the Board to report the number2421of cases not disposed of timely, identify contributing factors, and2422provide percentages for each factor. Many factors affect case2423timelines--staffing levels, productivity, evolving case law, case2424complexity, evidence volume, and appellant-requested delays. Within the2425Board's case management system, there are nearly 100 task assignments2426that influence processing time to varying degrees, making it difficult2427to isolate specific factors. Often, multiple factors, some of them2428subjective, apply to a single case.2429    Section 2 also adds reporting on remanded cases under the AMA or2430legacy system, requiring identification of factors and percentages.2431This creates a significant administrative and IT burden. Current2432systems track remands at the issue level, not the case level, so2433reporting by case would require major system changes. Many cases can2434have multiple issues remanded with multiple other dispositions in the2435same case. Accordingly, while reporting by issue is possible, it would2436produce confusing data because the number of remanded issues would not2437match the number of remanded cases.2438    In short, while we support transparency, these requirements would2439divert resources, create complexity, and risk slowing progress for2440Veterans.24412442    Position: VA supports the intent of this bill but cites concerns.2443VA is unable to assess the impact to budgetary resources at this time.24442445H.R. 4469  Providing Radiation Exposed Servicemembers Undisputed2446Medical Eligibility Act or the ``PRESUME Act''24472448    Section 2 of the proposed bill would amend 38 United States Code2449(U.S.C.) Sec.  1112 by adding the following new paragraph:24502451        ``The Secretary may not require evidence of a certain dose of2452        radiation to determine that a Veteran is a radiation-exposed2453        Veteran.''24542455    VA does not support this bill because it would not meaningfully2456change existing statutory or regulatory standards. Under 38 U.S.C.2457Sec.  1112, a `radiation-exposed veteran' is defined by participation2458in certain radiation-risk activities during service--not by dose2459estimates. Current law already grants presumptive service connection2460for Veterans who engaged in these activities and later develop the2461listed conditions. Dose evidence is only required when the claimed2462condition is not on the presumptive list.2463    This bill does not expand the list of presumptive diseases,2464redefine radiation-risk activities, or alter VA's approach for non-2465presumptive claims. In short, the PRESUME Act would largely restate2466existing practice and would not create new eligibility or relief. The2467bill's intent is unclear because radiation dose estimates do not factor2468into presumptions under Sec.  1112 or healthcare eligibility under2469Sec.  1710.24702471    Position: VA does not support this bill.24722473H.R. 5723  FRAUD in VA Disability Exam Act24742475    This bill would require VA to establish a process for auditing,2476identifying, and reporting fraudulent Disability Benefit Questionnaire2477(DBQ) activity, regardless of source. It mandates reporting suspected2478fraud to investigatory bodies, including the Office of Inspector2479General (OIG); creating a process for claims processors to flag and2480transmit suspected fraud; conducting recurring audits of all DBQs; and2481notifying individuals when their DBQs raise suspicion. The bill also2482prohibits reopening or changing benefit decisions based on2483investigations unless the individual is convicted of fraud and requires2484annual reporting on these activities.2485    VA appreciates the intent but notes this may duplicate existing2486processes. In Fiscal Year 2025, VA implemented mandatory training for2487claims processors and quality reviewers on identifying insufficient or2488potentially fraudulent DBQs and required actions when concerns arise.2489All DBQs--whether from VA-employed, VA-contracted, or public sources--2490are reviewed for consistency and integrity. When concerns arise, claims2491processors can refer cases to the OIG.2492    VA is concerned about the requirement to notify individuals whose2493DBQs are suspected of fraud, especially when exams were requested by VA2494and conducted by VA-employed or contracted examiners. The bill also2495prevents VA from revising decisions unless there is a fraud conviction.2496Under current practice, if fraud is suspected, VA typically offers a2497new exam and revises ratings as needed to ensure fairness. The proposed2498restriction would eliminate VA's ability to correct errors promptly,2499potentially harming Veterans who were not involved in fraudulent2500activity.25012502    Position: VA does not support this bill.25032504H.R. 5339  Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness Act25052506    This bill would create a new section, 38 U.S.C. Sec.  1120A, to2507establish presumptive service connection for certain diseases linked to2508toxin exposure at the Pentagon Reservation between September 11 and2509November 19, 2001.2510    VA does not support this bill. The listed conditions are broad and2511lack sufficient research support to confirm causality. While the number2512of affected Veterans may be small, the scientific basis for the2513proposed diseases is not established.2514    The bill references 38 U.S.C. Sec.  1119, which currently includes2515Gulf War Veterans with service in specific locations in Southwest Asia2516after August 2, 1990, and in certain other countries after September251711, 2001, creating confusion about who qualifies and which conditions2518apply. This could complicate benefit implementation and disrupt2519automated claims processes.2520    The proposed paragraph in Sec.  1120A(b)(9) adding presumptive2521diseases for Veterans linked to substances identified in 38 U.S.C.2522Sec.  1119(b)(2) would conflict with the specific definition of2523``covered Veteran'' already used for that section in Sec.  1119(c).2524Referencing Sec.  1119 in a bill about toxic-exposed Veterans could2525lead to confusion, suggesting that Veterans covered under Sec.  11192526are also eligible under Sec.  1120A, or that all conditions in Sec.25271119 apply to Sec.  1120A's covered Veterans.2528    The proposed legislation has overlaps and some differences with the2529September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, necessitating further inquiry2530into potential impacts for Veterans.2531    In short, VA opposes this bill due to unclear definitions,2532operational challenges, and insufficient evidence supporting the2533presumptions.25342535    Position: VA does not support this bill.25362537H.R. XXXX  Veterans Burial Allowance and Reimbursement Act of 202625382539    This bill would repeal 38 U.S.C. Sec.  2307 and amend Sec.  2303 to2540pay all burial and plot allowances--service-connected and non-service-2541connected--at the same rate. VA does not support this bill and instead2542recommends amending Sec.  2307.2543    Since 1973, VA has provided a higher burial allowance for service-2544connected deaths to recognize the sacrifice of Veterans whose deaths2545are related to service. Aligning the rates would eliminate that2546distinction. Under current law, the service-connected burial benefit is2547capped at $ 2,000 and has not increased since 2001, while non-service-2548connected benefits are indexed to inflation. As of October 1, 2025, the2549combined non-service-connected burial and plot allowance now exceeds2550the service-connected allowance.2551    VA recommends amending Sec.  2307 to authorize annual cost-of-2552living increases based on the Consumer Price Index, ensuring parity and2553preserving the intent to provide greater assistance for service-2554connected deaths. VA also recommends a one-time increase to restore the2555service-connected benefit as the higher amount. We defer to Congress on2556the rate but are ready to assist with analysis.25572558    Position: VA does not support this bill. VA recommends amending2559Sec.  2307 instead.25602561    H.R. XXXX  National Cemetery Administration Annual Report Act of2562202625632564    The National Cemetery Administration Annual Report Act of 20262565would add a new section, 38 U.S.C. Sec.  2415, requiring VA to submit2566an annual report to the Veterans' Affairs Committees. VA supports the2567intent of this bill. The report would improve transparency and provide2568Congress with consistent data on NCA operations, programs, and2569outcomes. Proposed topics--benefits administration, customer2570satisfaction, cemetery maps, burial options, and interment activity--2571are frequently requested by Congress, and consolidating this2572information would be helpful.2573    Many of these elements are already captured in NCA's annual2574statistical summary. However, some proposed requirements raise2575feasibility concerns. For example, Sec.  2415(b)(1) would require2576interment data broken down by cemetery, eligibility category under2577Sec.  2402(a)(1)-(10), and type of remains. Section 2415(b)(6) would2578require reporting memorial products by cemetery and eligibility2579category. Memorialization benefits, such as Presidential Memorial2580Certificates and headstones, are authorized under different statutes2581(Sec. Sec.  112 and 2306), and eligibility differs accordingly.2582    Current systems--Burial Operations Support System, the Memorial2583Benefits Management System, and related analytics--do not track data by2584the categories in Sec.  2402(a)(1)-(10). Meeting these requirements2585would require major system redesign or manual reconciliation, risking2586delays and data quality issues. NCA recommends revising the language in2587Sec.  2415(b)(1)(B) and (b)(6)(A) to align with reliable data points2588already maintained in our systems. This approach would meet the bill's2589intent while remaining operationally feasible.2590    NCA looks forward to working with the Committees to ensure the2591report fulfills oversight objectives and is analytically sound.25922593    Position: VA supports the intent of this bill; however, VA is2594unable to assess the impact to budgetary resources and therefore will2595follow up with the committee once this evaluation is complete or CBO2596has provided a score.25972598Conclusion25992600    I appreciate the opportunity to speak before you today and welcome2601any questions you may have. Thank you for your continued support of2602Veterans and the many programs to support them through the Department2603of Veterans Affairs.26042605                       Statements for the Record26062607                              ----------26082609                   Prepared Statement of ALS Network2610[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]26112612  Prepared Statement of National Association of Atomic Veterans, Inc.2613[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]26142615          Prepared Statement of Paralyzed Veterans of America26162617    Chairman Luttrell, Ranking Member McGarvey, and members of the2618subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) would like to thank2619you for the opportunity to submit our views on some of the bills being2620examined by the subcommittee today. No group of veterans understand the2621full scope of benefits and care provided by the Department of Veterans2622Affairs (VA) better than PVA members--veterans who have incurred a2623spinal cord injury or disorder (SCI/D).26242625H.R. 1004, the Love Lives on Act of 202526262627    When a military member or veteran dies, their spouse is eligible to2628receive a number of survivor benefits, but current law strips many of2629them if the spouse remarries again before age 55. This arbitrary age2630limit often prevents many surviving spouses from remarrying out of2631concern for the financial stability of their surviving children. These2632surviving spouses should be freed from the fear of losing the benefits2633owed to them through their late spouse's military sacrifice. PVA2634supports the Love Lives On Act, which would ensure they retain many2635benefits from both the VA and the Department of Defense (DOD),2636regardless of their age at the time of remarriage.26372638H.R. 1685, the Justice for ALS Veterans Act of 202526392640    Currently, if a veteran was rated totally disabled for a continuous2641period of at least 8 years immediately preceding death, their eligible2642survivor can receive an additional $360.85 per month in Dependency and2643Indemnity Compensation (DIC). This monetary installment is commonly2644referred to as the DIC ``kicker.''2645    Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is an aggressive disease that2646quickly leaves veterans incapacitated and reliant on family members and2647caregivers. Many spouses stop working to provide care for their loved2648one who, once diagnosed, only has an average lifespan of between three2649to 5 years. Because so few veterans survive beyond 5 years, the2650surviving spouses of veterans with ALS rarely qualify for the2651additional DIC benefit. Jann, the surviving spouse of a PVA member, was2652disqualified for this exact reason. Determined not to let this happen2653to other spouses, she helped PVA craft the Justice for ALS Veterans Act2654to make the surviving spouses of future veterans with ALS eligible for2655the DIC kicker, regardless of how long the veteran had the disease.2656    Members of this subcommittee were supportive of this legislation2657when it was reviewed in October 2021, but some suggested that there may2658be other service-connected conditions that deserve similar2659consideration. The VA recognizes ALS as a presumptive service-connected2660disease, and due to its progressive nature, automatically rates any2661diagnosed veteran at 100 percent once service connected. Although we2662are unaware of other service-connected conditions that have a 1002663percent mortality rate, like ALS, we are pleased this version of the2664bill incorporates PVA's recommended language directing the VA to study2665the matter and provide their findings to Congress. With the addition of2666this language, Congress should not further delay passage of this2667critical legislation.26682669H.R. 6698, the Board of Veterans Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act2670of 202526712672    PVA supports efforts like this bill to increase transparency of the2673Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) process. This legislation2674would require the Board to identify specific factors that contribute to2675the delay in the adjudication of pending appeals. PVA supports this2676bill, which requires these factors to be included in the Board's annual2677report that is published online to help find these inhibiting factors2678to help improve the appeals process.26792680H.R. 6943, the Veterans Burial Allowance and Reimbursement Act of 202626812682    This legislation would remove the distinction between non-service-2683connected and service-connected cause of death, as it pertains to2684eligibility for VA's burial allowance. Currently, a veteran who died2685due to a service-connected condition is eligible for $2,000 toward2686their funeral/burial expenses. A veteran who dies due to a non-service-2687connected condition is eligible for up to $1,002 for burial and $1,0022688toward a plot potentially equaling $2,004 toward funeral/burial2689expenses. PVA supports this legislation, which removes the service-2690connected allowance of $2,000 and instead amends the eligibility for2691the $1,002 for burial and $1,002 plot allowance to include those who2692die from a service-connected condition.26932694H.R. 4469, the Providing Radiation Exposed Servicemembers Undisputed2695Medical Eligibility (PRESUME) Act26962697    Veterans exposed to radiation during service may be eligible for VA2698disability compensation. Currently, the VA recognizes specific2699conditions as being presumptively caused by exposure to ionizing2700radiation that may have occurred during service. However, when a2701veteran applies for their compensation benefits, the VA asks DOD's2702Defense Threat Reduction Agency to confirm exposure and to provide the2703actual or estimated radiation dose the veteran received. PVA supports2704this legislation which rescinds the need for a veteran to prove that2705the amount of ionizing radiation they were exposed was sufficient to2706warrant service-connection for their conditions.27072708H.R. 5723, the Fraud Reduction And Uncovering Deception (FRAUD) in VA2709Disability Exam Act27102711    PVA supports the intent of this legislation and appreciates that2712the bill seeks to look at Disability Benefits Questionnaires (DBQs)2713submitted from all sources, not just the veteran. However, we disagree2714that individuals responsible for processing claims for benefits have2715the adequate expertise to identify and report issues with DBQs. Also,2716we are concerned that this legislation does not specify who in the2717process will be responsible for identifying and reporting fraud. Adding2718requirements like this would help improve the oversight process that2719already exists. PVA strongly believes that the VA could improve the2720quality control review of an incoming DBQ before it is input into a2721veteran's file, and further, can ensure that fraud can be investigated2722and prosecuted. Currently, VA claims processers have the authority ``to2723evaluate and weigh all evidence of record, including privately2724completed DBQs. If it is determined that a privately completed DBQ2725contains indicator(s) of inauthenticity that are substantive enough to2726deem it potentially inauthentic or fraudulent, claims processors have2727the authority to assign low or no probative value to the privately2728completed DBQ.'' But if a DBQ is completed by a contracted examiner,2729the claims processors ``are not expected to routinely scrutinize or2730question the credentials of clinical personnel to determine the2731acceptability of their reports, unless there is contradictory evidence2732of record.'' However, according to the VA's Clinician's Guide, it2733informs contract providers, ``It is important to remember that2734[Veterans Benefits Administration] Raters are not clinicians and2735therefore may not understand concepts that are considered basic or2736assumed by those educated in the field of medicine.'' This leads to2737obvious questions of whether the claims processors are actually picking2738up on the adequacy of DBQs and the possibility of fraudulent/2739inconsistent findings being recorded by either outside providers or2740contracted examiners.2741    VA's Medical Disability Examiners Office (MDEO) presently employs2742approximately 20 quality analysts whose job is to review DBQs that are2743received from contractors and determine whether or not they are2744``contractually compliant'' by ensuring that the reports include all2745requested issues, reviewing for discrepancies, and whether or not the2746report described the condition(s) that have impacted the veterans2747ability to work, among other requirements. However, these analysts only2748have access to the DBQs after they have been uploaded to the Veterans2749Benefits Management System (VBMS), which is the same time claims2750processors receive them. Many times, this is too late as the processors2751are waiting to finalize a claim and only need the DBQ to finish the2752rating process. According to a Government Accountability Office (GAO)2753report from August 2025, ``MDEO also analyzes the effects of checklist2754errors on claims, such as delays associated with correcting errors.2755MDEO officials say many claims continue through processing and are2756decided before the office completes its checklist review. After MDEO2757identifies errors, claims processors determine if the errors affected2758their decisions on the claims.''2759    To effectively do their jobs and to provide real oversight to the2760claims process, PVA believes that MDEO should make two changes to the2761claims process. First, prior to them being downloaded to VBMS, all2762DBQs, regardless of whether they are provided by the veteran or a2763contractor, should go into a drop box that is only accessible by the2764quality analysts. Second, the quality analysts should be trained and2765required to review the forms for contractual compliance and for2766potential fraud/inconsistent findings. Only after this review has been2767done should the forms be uploaded to VBMS and the claims process be2768allowed to continue.27692770H.R. 5339, the Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness Act27712772    This legislation would allow presumptive service-connection for2773eight conditions that veterans who were exposed to toxins during their2774service at the Pentagon between September 11 and November 19, 2001,2775subsequently develop. Many service members were exposed to chemicals2776and toxic substances during the period after the 9/11 terrorist attacks2777after having to return to duty at the Pentagon before the building was2778determined to be safe. PVA supports legislation that would help2779veterans receive their benefits for conditions they incurred due to2780their time of service.27812782H.R. 7260, the National Cemetery Administration Annual Report Act of2783    202627842785    PVA supports this draft legislation, which would require the VA to2786submit an annual report on the National Cemetery Administration (NCA).2787This report would include key information such as the number of2788interments performed by the NCA by cemetery, burial options at each2789location, completed or planned cemetery construction projects, and data2790on grants awarded for veterans cemeteries. Additionally, it allows the2791VA to include any other metrics they feel would be appropriate. PVA2792believes this report would help the VA with long-term planning within2793the NCA to ensure that our veterans and service members' families can2794lay their loved ones to rest with dignity and respect for generations2795to come.2796    PVA would once again like to thank the subcommittee for the2797opportunity to present our views on the legislation being considered2798today. We look forward to working with you on this legislation and2799would be happy to answer any questions.28002801  Information Required by Rule XI 2(g) of the House of Representatives28022803Pursuant to Rule XI 2(g) of the House of Representatives, the following2804information is provided regarding Federal grants and contracts.28052806                            Fiscal Year 202628072808Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of National Veterans Sports2809Programs & Special Events--Grant to support rehabilitation sports2810activities--$368,500.28112812                            Fiscal Year 202528132814Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of National Veterans Sports2815Programs & Special Events----Grant to support rehabilitation sports2816activities--$502,000.28172818                            Fiscal Year 202328192820    Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of National Veterans Sports2821Programs & Special Events----Grant to support rehabilitation sports2822activities--$479,000.28232824                     Disclosure of Foreign Payments28252826    Paralyzed Veterans of America is largely supported by donations2827from the general public. However, in some very rare cases we receive2828direct donations from foreign nationals. In addition, we receive2829funding from corporations and foundations which in some cases are U.S.2830subsidiaries of non-U.S. companies.28312832        Prepared Statement of Gold Star Spouses of America, Inc.2833[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]28342835     Prepared Statement of Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors2836[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]28372838               Prepared Statement of The Invisible Enemy2839[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]28402841         Prepared Statement of Reserve Organization of America2842[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]28432844  Prepared Statement of National Organization of Veterans' Advocates,2845                                  Inc.28462847    Chairman Luttrell, Ranking Member McGarvey, and members of the DAMA2848Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to offer our views on2849pending legislation.2850    NOVA is a not-for-profit 501(c)(6) educational membership2851organization incorporated in the District of Columbia in 1993. NOVA2852represents over 900 accredited attorneys, agents, and other qualified2853members practicing across the country and assisting tens of thousands2854of our Nation's military veterans, survivors, family members, and2855caregivers seeking to obtain their earned benefits from VA. NOVA2856members advocate for their clients before the Department of Veterans2857Affairs (VA), Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board), U.S. Court of Appeals2858for Veterans Claims (CAVC), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal2859Circuit (Federal Circuit), and U.S. Supreme Court. NOVA works to2860develop and encourage high standards of service and representation for2861all persons seeking VA benefits.2862    NOVA advocates for laws and policies that advance the rights of2863veterans. For example, NOVA collaborated with Veteran Service2864Organizations (VSOs) and other accredited representatives, VA, and2865Congress on appeals modernization reform. Those efforts resulted in2866passage of the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act2867(AMA), P.L. 115-55, 131 Stat. 1105, which was signed into law in 2017.2868At the time of its passage, VA emphasized the AMA would provide2869claimants with more choice and control over the disability claims and2870appeals adjudication process by expanding their review options.2871    NOVA also advances important cases and files amicus briefs in2872others. See, e.g., NOVA v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 710 F.3d 13282873(Fed. Cir. 2013) (addressing VA's failure to honor its commitment to2874stop applying an invalid rule); Procopio v. Wilkie, 913 F.3d 1371 (Fed.2875Cir. 2019) (amicus); NOVA v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 981 F.3d28761360 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (M21-1 rule was interpretive rule of general2877applicability and agency action subject to judicial review); National2878Organization of Veterans' Advocates, Inc., et al., v. Secretary of2879Veterans Affairs, 981 F.3d 1360 (2022) (Federal Circuit invalidated2880knee replacement rule); Arellano v. McDonough, 598 U.S. 1 (2023)2881(amicus); Terry v. McDonough, 37 Vet.App. 1 (2023) (amicus); Bufkin v.2882Collins, 604 U.S.(2025)_(amicus).2883    A critical part of NOVA's mission is to educate advocates. NOVA2884currently conducts two conferences per year, each offering2885approximately 15 hours of continuing legal education (CLE) credit for2886attendees. Experts from within and outside the membership present and2887train on the latest developments and best practices in veterans law and2888policy. NOVA sustaining members must participate in at least one2889conference every 24 months to maintain eligibility to appear in our2890public-facing advocate directory. In addition to conferences, NOVA2891offers webinars, online support, peer-to-peer mentorship, and other2892guidance to its members to enhance their advocacy skills.2893    NOVA provides feedback on the following bills.28942895                  H.R. 1004, Love Lives On Act of 202528962897    NOVA continues its support for H.R. 1004, Love Lives On Act of28982025. This important bipartisan legislation, which currently has 1282899cosponsors, would remove the bar to furnishing benefits to surviving2900spouses who remarry before the age of 55 and restore certain benefits2901to surviving spouses who remarried before age 55. Many surviving2902spouses forego remarriage due to the impending loss of important earned2903benefits that provide long-term security to themselves and their2904families. Congress should promptly remedy this injustice.29052906              H.R. 1685, Justice for ALS Veterans of 202529072908    NOVA supports H.R. 1685, Justice for ALS Veterans of 2025, which2909would extend increased dependency and indemnity (DIC) compensation to2910the surviving spouse of veteran who dies from amyotrophic lateral2911sclerosis (ALS) regardless of how long the veteran had ALS prior to2912death. Current law only provides for enhanced DIC benefits for2913surviving spouses of veterans who were rated totally disabled for at2914least 8 years prior to death. Given the devastating effects of this2915disease on veterans and their families, expansion of DIC would provide2916critical benefits to this population of survivors.29172918   H.R. 4469, Providing Radiation Exposed Servicemembers Undisputed2919                   Medical Eligibility (PRESUME) Act29202921    NOVA supports H.R. 4469, Providing Radiation Exposed Servicemembers2922Undisputed Medical Eligibility (PRESUME) Act. This bill will help all2923veterans who have been exposed to radiation get proper consideration by2924VA in their radiation-related claims.29252926       H.R. 5339, Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness Act29272928    NOVA supports H.R. 5339, Susan E. Lukas 9/11 Servicemember Fairness2929Act. This bill will extend presumptive service connection for certain2930conditions to those who served on active duty at the Pentagon between2931September 11, 2001, and November 19, 2001.29322933   H.R. 5723, Fraud Reduction And Uncovering Deception (FRAUD) in VA2934                          Disability Exam Act29352936    NOVA supports the intent of H.R. 5723, but amendments are needed.2937NOVA supports ensuring proper investigation of those who submit2938fraudulent disability benefit questionnaires (DBQs) in support of VA2939disability benefits claims. However, the bill as written is not2940sufficiently detailed and could result in veterans being unfairly2941targeted.2942    Specifically, under proposed 38 U.S.C. Sec.  5322(a)(3), notice2943must be expanded. As currently written, this subsection would require2944the Secretary to only inform ``the individual who submitted the2945disability benefit questionnaire form or claim.'' This notice is not2946sufficiently specific. This subsection should be amended as follows:2947``with respect to such disability benefit questionnaire forms or such2948claims that the Secretary suspects may contain fraudulent information,2949informing the following individuals of suspicion of fraudulent2950activity: (1) the individual who signed the disability benefit2951questionnaire; (2) the claimant in connection with whose claim the2952disability questionnaire was submitted; and (3) that claimant's2953representative, if any.''2954    NOVA is also concerned about the broad language found at proposed2955subsection 5322(c)(2), which would permit VA to upset final, favorable2956decisions when the individual convicted is not the veteran. In those2957instances, the claimant may be unaware of the fraud. Unless the2958claimant is convicted of fraud, overturning final grants would punish2959the wrong person. We recommend the following change: ``Paragraph (1)2960shall not apply in any case in which, pursuant to an investigation of2961the Inspector General under subsection (b), the claimant is convicted2962by a court of competent jurisdiction of a crime relating to fraudulent2963activity in the submission to the Secretary of evidence supporting a2964claim for benefits under laws administered by the Secretary.''2965    Congress should also consider that the unfettered rise of2966unaccredited claims consultants and coaches has resulted in the2967submission of thousands of DBQs. It is unclear if VA is tracking these2968submissions since VA has no way of knowing if anyone is assisting a pro2969se veteran. These unaccredited individuals operate behind the scenes2970and are unaccountable to VA (unlike accredited VSOs, attorneys, and2971agents). Congress should seek specific information from VA about any2972current efforts to track these submissions and require VA to seek2973additional information from veterans - as simple as a checkbox on a2974form - regarding any assistance received from an outside company.29752976H.R. 6698, Board of Veterans' Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of2977                                  202529782979    NOVA supports the intent of H.R. 6698 and recommends two changes.2980First, Congress should define what ``timely'' disposition means.2981Second, Congress should require all reporting to distinguish between2982those cases that are advanced on the docket versus those that are not2983advanced.29842985                               Conclusion29862987    NOVA appreciates the opportunity to present its views to the2988Subcommittee. We remain committed to working with this Committee, VA,2989and accredited stakeholders to improve the VA disability and claims2990adjudication process for veterans, survivors, family members, and2991caregivers.29922993For more information:29942995    NOVA staff would be happy to assist you with any further inquiries2996you may have regarding our views on this important topic. For questions2997regarding this testimony or if you would like to request additional2998information, please feel free to contact Diane Boyd Rauber by calling2999NOVA's office at (202) 587-5708 or by emailing Diane directly at3000drauber@vetadvocates.org.30013002                    Prepared Statement of Berry Law3003[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]30043005                    Prepared Statement of ALS United3006[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]30073008               Prepared Statement of The ALS Association30093010    The ALS Association would like to thank Chairperson Luttrell,3011Ranking Member McGarvey, and the members of the House Veterans Affairs3012Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs for the3013opportunity to submit this statement for the record for the hearing on3014legislation in your subcommittee.3015    H.R. 1685--Justice for ALS Veterans Act ensures that veterans and3016families who have made the ultimate sacrifice for this country receive3017benefits they cannot qualify for, through no fault of their own.3018Boosted Dependency and Indemnity payments grants peace of mind to3019current veterans living with ALS because they will know their families3020are supported after they are gone.3021    The ALS Association endorses this legislation and asks the Veterans3022Affairs Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs to3023consider and swiftly pass H.R. 1685 to deliver boosted DIC benefits3024surviving families have earned.30253026Background30273028    Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is an always fatal3029neurodegenerative disease in which a person's brain loses connection3030with the muscles. People with ALS lose their ability to walk, talk, eat3031and eventually breathe. There is no cure, and the average life3032expectancy following diagnosis is 2-5 years.3033    Military veterans, regardless of branch of service, the era in3034which they served, and whether they served during a time of peace or a3035time of war, are at a greater risk of dying from ALS than those who3036have not served in uniform. For this reason, the Department of Veterans3037Affairs has labeled ALS as a presumptive service-connected disease3038rated at 100 percent disability upon diagnosis because ALS never3039improves and, in all cases, leads to total body paralysis.3040    While high-quality, multi-disciplinary care for ALS is provided by3041the Department of Veterans Affairs, military veterans living with ALS3042require care that extends outside of the clinical setting. Veterans3043living with ALS rely on their spouses, children, parents, and friends3044to provide the round-the-clock caregiving they need. The aggressiveness3045of ALS leaves many veterans totally incapacitated and reliant on family3046caregivers. It is an incredible price that veterans living with ALS and3047their loved ones pay as a result of their service to our country.30483049Support for H.R. 1685 the Justice for ALS Veterans Act30503051    The ALS Association wholeheartedly supports H.R. 1685--Justice for3052ALS Veterans Act, to ensure families of veterans are supported after3053their loved one passes.3054    The surviving spouses of veterans with a 100 percent disability3055rating are eligible to receive Dependency and Indemnity Compensation3056(DIC) payments from the VA after their loved one passes. However, to be3057eligible for the boosted DIC benefit, also known as the ``kicker,'' a3058veteran must live with a totally disabling condition for 8 years. With3059average life expectancy for ALS post-diagnosis ranging from 2-5 years,3060most veterans who have service-connected ALS will not meet the current3061criteria for the boosted DIC payment. This is a fixable injustice for3062veterans living with ALS who already have little time left with their3063loved ones.3064    The bipartisan Justice for ALS Veterans Act, sponsored by3065Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Chris Pappas (D-NH)3066ensures fairness by eliminating the 8-year survival requirement for3067veterans with ALS.3068    Families of veterans living with ALS who serve admirably as3069caregivers should not be penalized because of an ALS diagnosis that3070offers them less time with their loved ones than the current3071requirement stipulates. Ensuring this boosted benefit, which equates to3072little more than $300 a month for a surviving family, can make a marked3073difference.30743075               Prepared Statement of The American Legion3076[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]30773078                                 [all]