69–006 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 114–813 

PROTECTING VETERANS’ EDUCATIONAL CHOICE ACT OF 

2016 

NOVEMBER 14, 2016.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. MILLER of Florida, from the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 5047] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 5047) to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the 

Secretary of Labor to provide information to veterans and members 

of the Armed Forces about articulation agreements between institutions of higher learning, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and 

recommend that the bill do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 2 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 2 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 3 

Subcommittee Consideration .................................................................................. 4 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 4 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 4 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 4 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 4 

New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures ............. 4 

Earmarks and Tax and Tariff Benefits .................................................................. 5 

Committee Cost Estimate ....................................................................................... 5 

Congressional Budget Office Estimate ................................................................... 5 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 6 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 6 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 6 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 6 

Statement on Duplication of Federal Programs .................................................... 6 

Disclosure of Directed Rulemaking ........................................................................ 6 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 6 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill as Reported ...................................... 7 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE
2 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

H.R. 5047, the ‘‘Protecting Veterans’ Educational Choice Act of 

2016,’’ was introduced by Representative Jody Hice of Georgia on 

April 25, 2016. H.R. 5047 would require that, when the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides educational counseling or a 

certificate of eligibility to veterans and servicemembers eligible for 

VA education benefits, it also provide information on articulation 

agreements at institutions of higher learning. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 cites the short title of H.R. 5047, to be the ‘‘Protecting 

Veterans’ Educational Choice Act of 2016.’’ 

Section 2. Department of Veterans Affairs provision of information 

on articulation agreements between institutions of higher learning 

Since the inception of the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill in 2009, over 1.5 

million beneficiaries have received benefits through this program, 

which subsidizes student veterans’ and their eligible dependents’ 

attendance at a variety of institutions of higher learning, whether 

it be public, private, for-profit schools, etc. The Committee has 

found that many student veterans do not use all of their benefits 

at just one school and transfer to another school or program at 

some point in their educational career. If they do transfer schools, 

their previously earned credits can play a large role in determining 

the length of time it may take for students to complete their program at their new school, and in some cases, not all earned credits 

may transfer over. 

The Committee believes that veterans or servicemembers planning to use their education benefits should have a full understanding of their school’s credit transfer policies with other schools 

before attending such institution. To help students understand the 

transfer of credits, most schools have set up articulation agreements. These agreements outline a school or training program’s 

policy for accepting students’ credits earned from another institution, and they are used to specify the acceptability of certain 

courses towards meeting degree, certificate, or program requirements. Knowledge of the school’s articulation agreements would 

empower student veterans to make the right choice about a school 

or program that appropriately provides them credit for previous 

coursework or training. 

The Committee is also concerned that too few veterans are taking advantage of the free educational and vocational counseling 

provided by VA through Chapter 36 of title 38, U.S.C. When testifying at a full Committee legislative hearing on H.R. 5047, Mr. 

Raymond C. Kelley, Director of the National Legislative Service of 

the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States agreed and stated the following: 

There are reports suggesting some veterans are not receiving a satisfactory education when using their G.I. Bill 

benefits and other tuition assistance programs. This is because student veterans are bombarded with overwhelming 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE
3 

amounts of educational information with little or no training on how to make an informed decision. We believe this 

issue stems from veterans being unaware of free pre-enrollment counseling services offered by VA. 

To address this issue and further inform veterans about the importance of articulation agreements, Section 2 of H.R. 5047 would 

require VA, within 90 days of enactment, to provide information regarding vocational and educational counseling available under 

Chapter 36 of title 38, U.S.C., to student veterans. The Secretary 

would be required to provide this information in the veteran’s certificate of eligibility for G.I. Bill benefits. Additionally, Section 2 

would require that VA provide information about articulation 

agreements of any school or training program at the request of the 

veteran if they are interested in attending that school. 

The Committee believes the requirements in Section 2 would 

strengthen VA’s existing regulations and practices, and would provide student veterans with additional necessary information to 

make an informed choice about which school or training program 

is best for them. 

HEARINGS

On June 23, 2016, the full Committee conducted a legislative 

hearing on various draft bills and bills introduced during the 114th 

Congress, including H.R. 5047. The following witnesses testified: 

The Honorable Doug Lamborn, U.S. House of Representatives, 5th District of Colorado; The Honorable Dina Titus, U.S. 

House of Representatives, 1st District of Nevada, The Honorable Raul Ruiz, U.S. House of Representatives, 36th District of 

California; The Honorable Beto O’Rourke, U.S. House of Representatives, 16th District of Texas; The Honorable Ron 

DeSantis, U.S. House of Representatives, 6th District of Florida; The Honorable Ted Yoho, U.S. House of Representatives, 

3rd District of Florida; The Honorable Jody Hice, U.S. House 

of Representatives, 10th District of Georgia; The Honorable 

Dan Newhouse, U.S. House of Representatives, 4th District of 

Washington; The Honorable David Young, U.S. House of Representatives, 3rd District of Iowa; The Honorable Sloan Gibson, 

Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs who 

was accompanied by Ms. Laura Eskenazi, Executive in Charge 

and Vice Chairman, Board of Veterans Appeals, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Mr. David McLenachen, Deputy 

Under Secretary for Disability Assistance, Veterans Benefits 

Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and Dr. 

Maureen McCarthy, Assistant Deputy Under Secretary for 

Health Patient Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, 

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; Mr. Raymond Kelley, Director of the National Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign 

Wars of the United States; Mr. Paul Varela, Assistant National 

Legislative Director, Disabled American Veterans; Mr. Carl 

Blake, Associate Executive Director of Government Relations, 

Paralyzed Veterans of America; Mr. Louis J. Celli, Jr., Director 

of the National Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Division, 

The American Legion; and Mr. Rick Weidman, Executive DiVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:43 Nov 22, 2016 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR813.XXX HR813

smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE
4 

rector for Policy and Government Affairs, Vietnam Veterans of 

America. 

A Statement for the Record was submitted by the following: 

American Battle Monuments Commission; AMVETS; U.S. 

Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; Iraq and Afghanistan 

Veterans of America; Military Officers Association of America; 

Military Veterans Advocacy, Inc.; National Organization of 

Veterans Advocates; National Veterans Legal Services Program; P.A.W.S. Foundation; Stetson University College of 

Law’s Veterans Law Institute; and the U.S. Department of 

Labor. 

SUBCOMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

There was no Subcommittee consideration of H.R. 5047. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On September 21, 2016, the full Committee met in open markup 

session, a quorum being present, and ordered H.R. 5047, favorably 

reported to the House of Representatives by voice vote. 

A motion by Representative Mark Takano of California to report 

H.R. 5047 favorably to the House of Representatives was agreed to 

by voice vote. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, no recorded votes were taken on amendments or in connection with ordering H.R. 5047 reported to the 

House. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause (2)(b)(1) 

of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the 

descriptive portions of this report. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee’s performance goals and 

objectives are to ensure the Secretary of Veterans Affairs provides 

information to GI Bill eligible students about schools’ articulation 

agreements. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX

EXPENDITURES

In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its own the estimate of new budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues contained in the cost estimate prepared by 

the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE
5 

EARMARKS AND TAX AND TARIFF BENEFITS

H.R. 5047 does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule 

XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate on H.R. 5047, 

prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate for H.R. 5047, 

provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, October 12, 2016. 

Hon. JEFF MILLER, 

Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5047, the Protecting Veterans’ Educational Choice Act of 2016. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is David Newman. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL. 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 5047—Protecting Veterans’ Educational Choice Act of 2016 

H.R. 5047 would require the Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) to include information on articulation agreements when it provides educational and vocational counseling to veterans. Articulation agreements are arrangements between institutions of higher 

learning regarding how those institutions will grant academic credit for course work pursued at other such institutions. CBO expects 

that if the bill were enacted, VA would provide veterans with the 

required information as part of its regular counseling services. 

CBO estimates that the cost of collecting the necessary information from educational institutions would be less than $500,000 over 

the 2017–2021 period; such spending would by subject to the availability of appropriated funds. 

Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

CBO estimates that enacting HR. 5047 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2027. 

H.R. 5047 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE
6 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is David Newman, The 

estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates regarding H.R. 5047, prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act would be created by H.R. 5047. 

STATEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

Pursuant to Article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution, 

H.R. 5047 is authorized by Congress’ power to ‘‘provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that H.R. 5047, does not relate to the terms 

and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. 

STATEMENT ON DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Pursuant to section 3(g) of H. Res. 5, 114th Cong. (2015), the 

Committee finds that no provision of H.R. 5047, establishes or reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included 

in any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111–139, or a program 

related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULEMAKING

Pursuant to section 3(i) of H. Res. 5, 114th Cong. (2015), the 

Committee estimates that H.R. 5047 contains no directed rule making that would require the Secretary to prescribe regulations. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 cites the short title of H.R. 5047, to be the ‘‘Protecting 

Veterans’ Educational Choice Act of 2016.’’ 

Section 2. Department of Veterans Affairs provision of information 

on articulation agreements between institutions of higher learning 

Section 2(a) would require that VA counselors who provide educational or vocational counseling pursuant to section 3697A of title 

38, U.S.C., also provide information to eligible beneficiaries about 

the articulation agreements of each institution of higher learning 

that they are interested in attending. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE
7 

Section 2(b) would require that when VA provides a certificate of 

eligibility to veterans for education assistance under title 38, 

U.S.C., that they also provide detailed information about their educational assistance benefits including information on requesting 

education counseling and articulation agreements. 

Section 2(c) would provide definitions for terms used by this section. The term ‘‘institution of higher learning’’ would have the 

meaning given to such term in section 3452(f) of title 38, U.S.C. 

The term ‘‘articulation agreement’’ would have the meaning given 

to such term in section 486A of the Higher Education Act of 1965 

(P.L. 89–329). 

Section 2(d) would require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to 

implement this Section no later than 90 days after enactment. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with REPORTS-HSE