U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

35–467 WASHINGTON : 2019

LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 1206; H.R. 3023; 

H.R. 3940; H.R. 4451; H.R. 4830; H.R. 4835; H.R. 

5044; AND A DRAFT BILL ENTITLED, ‘‘VA HOME 

LOAN IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2018’’ 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC 

OPPORTUNITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2018 

Serial No. 115–54 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee, Chairman 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice-Chairman 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio 

AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN, American 

Samoa 

MIKE BOST, Illinois 

BRUCE POLIQUIN, Maine 

NEAL DUNN, Florida 

JODEY ARRINGTON, Texas 

JOHN RUTHERFORD, Florida 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

JACK BERGMAN, Michigan 

JIM BANKS, Indiana 

JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto 

Rico 

TIM WALZ, Minnesota, Ranking Member 

MARK TAKANO, California 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire 

BETO O’ROURKE, Texas 

KATHLEEN RICE, New York 

J. LUIS CORREA, California 

KILILI SABLAN, Northern Mariana Islands 

ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut 

SCOTT PETERS, California 

JON TOWERS, Staff Director 

RAY KELLEY, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY 

JODEY ARRINGTON, Texas, Chairman 

GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio 

JOHN RUTHERFORD, Florida 

JIM BANKS, Indiana 

BETO O’ROURKE, Texas, Ranking Member 

MARK TAKANO, California 

LUIS CORREA, California 

KATHLEEN RICE, New York 

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House, public hearing records 

of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs are also published in electronic form. The printed 

hearing record remains the official version. Because electronic submissions are used to 

prepare both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of converting 

between various electronic formats may introduce unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the current publication process and should diminish as the process 

is further refined. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Tuesday, March 20, 2018 

Page 

Legislative Hearing On H.R. 1206; H.R. 3023; H.R. 3940; H.R. 4451; H.R. 

4830; H.R. 4835; H.R. 5044; And A Draft Bill Entitled, ‘‘VA Home Loan 

Improvement Act Of 2018’’ .................................................................................. 1 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Honorable Jodey Arrington, Chairman .................................................................. 1 

Honorable Beto O’Rourke, Ranking Member ........................................................ 2 

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Luke Messer, U.S. House of Representatives, 6th Congressional District; Indiana ........................................................................................ 2 

The Honorable Ted Poe, U.S. House of Representatives, 2nd Congressional 

District; Texas ...................................................................................................... 4 

The Honorable Steve Russell, U.S. House of Representatives, 5th Congressional District; Oklahoma .................................................................................... 5 

The Honorable Brad Wenstrup, U.S. House of Representatives, 2nd Congressional District; Ohio ............................................................................................. 6 

The Honorable Gus Bilirakis, U.S. House of Representatives, 12th Congressional District; Florida ......................................................................................... 7 

MG Robert M. Worley II USAF (Ret.), Director, Education Service, Veterans 

Benefit Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ........................ 9 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 22 

Accompanied by: 

Mr. Jeffrey London, Director, Loan Guaranty Service, Veterans Benefits 

Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 

Mr. John J. Kamin, Assistant Director, Veterans Employment and Education 

Division, The American Legion ........................................................................... 11 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 25 

Ms. Ashlynne Haycock, Manager, Education Services, Tragedy Assistance 

Program for Survivors ......................................................................................... 13 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 30 

Mr. William Hubbard, Vice President of Government Affairs, Student Veterans of America .................................................................................................. 14 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 33 

Bonnie Carroll, Founder and President, Tragedy Assistance Program For 

Survivors, prepared statement only ................................................................... 40 

STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD 

Matt Miller, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Veterans’ Employment And Training Service, U.S. Department Of Labor ............................................................. 40 

Jared Lyon, Student Veterans of America (SVA) ................................................. 43 

Joseph W. Wescott II, Legislative Director, National Association of State 

Approving Agencies, Inc., For Veterans Education and Training .................... 44 

Larry Madison, Legislative Director, The Retired Enlisted Association ............. 45 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

(1) 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 1206; H.R. 

3023; H.R. 3940; H.R. 4451; H.R. 4830; H.R. 4835; 

H.R. 5044; AND A DRAFT BILL ENTITLED, 

‘‘VA HOME LOAN IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 

2018’’ 

Tuesday, March 20, 2018 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC

OPPORTUNITY

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in Room 

334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jodey Arrington [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Bilirakis, Wenstrup, Rutherford, Banks, 

O’Rourke, Correa. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF JODEY ARRINGTON, CHAIRMAN 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Let me go ahead and gavel in. 

Good afternoon, everybody. The Subcommittee will now come to 

order. I want to thank you all for joining us here today to discuss 

8 pieces of legislation pending before the Subcommittee with the 

intentions of benefitting the lives of our servicemembers, veterans, 

and their families. 

The bills brought forth by our colleagues today would make additional improvements and changes to the GI Bill and VA’s Home 

Loan Program, as well as provide additional resources for 

servicemembers after they transition to civilian life; make minor 

and technical changing to ensure surviving spouses retain ownership of a servicemember’s small business after they have passed 

away; and improve the Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program, 

administered by the Department of Labor. 

I will let our colleagues who introduced these pieces of legislation 

discuss their bills in greater detail, but I do want to briefly discuss 

the one draft bill on the agenda today that has not yet been introduced. This proposal encompasses the language of two bills that we 

have already examined in this Subcommittee and have gone 

through regular order that would make changes to the Home Loan 

Program administered by the VA. Part of the bill would eliminate 

the current conforming loan limit for VA-backed mortgages so that 

veterans are able to afford homes in higher-cost areas. 

This would not change the underwriting standards currently in 

place for veterans to become eligible for the loan, but would ensure 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

2 

veterans are not barred from buying a home in more expensive 

areas of the country, due to some arbitrary caps set by the Government. 

This draft also includes language from the bill that Ranking 

Member O’Rourke and I introduced earlier this Congress, to improve the appraisal process for VA home loans by allowing VA-approved appraisers to use the information provided to them by a 

third-party appraiser for their desktop. This is from their—from 

their desktop, rather—this proposal would improve the processing 

time for appraisals so that veterans are able to close on their 

homes in a quicker and more seamless manner. 

Lastly, this draft would require veterans who are less than 100 

percent service-disconnected disabled to pay the fund—the funding 

fee on their VA home loan if they purchase a home that costs more 

than the current conforming loan; i.e., a more expensive home in 

a high-cost area. This funding fee would be rolled into the life of 

the loan and would still be—then be allowed—a veteran to use 

their VA home loan with a zero down payment. 

I am eager to discuss each of the 7 pieces of legislation before 

us today. I am also grateful to my colleagues who have introduced 

these bills and to our witnesses who are here to discuss them. 

Before I yield to my friend and Ranking Member, Mr. O’Rourke, 

do I want to briefly touch on the frustration that we feel on the 

Committee—and maybe I should just speak for myself—with the 

Department of Labor, for once again declining to testify at our Subcommittee hearing, simply because they would be on a panel with 

non-Government witnesses. 

I don’t understand that, Mr. Ranking Member, and I am going 

to send a letter and follow up. Today’s hearing would be—have 

benefited from DOL’s participation, as there is several bills on the 

agenda that affect their Department and the customers they serve, 

and our customers are veterans. Notwithstanding this policy by 

Labor, I do want to thank General Worley and our partners at the 

VA for participating in today’s hearing. 

And, now, finally, I will yield to the Ranking Member from the 

Great State of Texas for any opening statements he might have. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF BETO O’ROURKE, RANKING 

MEMBER 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Mr. Chairman, thank you. And in the interests 

of hearing from our colleagues, I will waive any opening remarks. 

I look forward to learning more about these bills and working together with you and other Members of the Committee to see how 

we can improve the care and services that we provide to those who 

have served this country. 

With that, I will yield back. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Messer, since you were here first, I am 

going to go ahead and start with you and save the Texan for the 

best for the last, you know? 

STATEMENT OF HONORABLE LUKE MESSER 

Mr. MESSER. I have to admit, I am a little surprised. I assumed 

here, Texas would just come first, just looking at the leadership of 

the panel— 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

3 

Mr. ARRINGTON. As I said, the best for the last. 

Mr. MESSER [continued]. —but I appreciate the politeness. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. You have got 5 minutes. I yield to your time, sir. 

Mr. MESSER. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Arrington, and 

other Members of the Committee, the Members of the Economic 

Opportunity Subcommittee, including my good friend and a great 

and distinguished Hoosier, Congressman Jim Banks, for his leadership on this Committee and who is also a co-sponsor of the legislation that I am going to talk to you about today. 

This bill is just a common sense, bipartisan bill that provides 

greater flexibility in the way our veterans can use GI Bill benefits. 

As we all know, the GI Bill has provided millions of our Nation’s 

veterans who have served our country, the opportunity to pursue 

a college degree. As we near the 75th anniversary of the program’s 

inception, it remains one of the most successful Federal programs 

in our Nation’s history, as it has empowered veterans and their 

families to pursue their dreams. 

However, the GI Bill does not cover the cost of one of the first 

steps towards earning a degree: the cost of applying to go to college. The typical fee for a single college application can now rise 

to as much as $90 and with school admittance experts recommending prospective students apply to 6 or 8 schools, total application costs can create an unexpected financial burden and a barrier 

to opportunity with costs of hundreds of dollars per student. 

The Reducing Barriers for Veterans Education Act would remove 

this financial barrier by allowing veterans to voluntary choose to 

use part of their Post-9/11 GI Bill to cover the cost of application 

fees. This bipartisan bill would not expand the entitlement, because the cost of application fees, up to $750, would be deducted 

from our, the veteran’s overall benefit. 

Our men and women in uniform deserve a modern sized GI 

Bill—I appreciate this Committee’s work in that regard—a modernized bill that removes obstacles that our veterans face when they 

are pursuing a degree. This legislation is a simple, common sense 

change that makes it easier for our veterans to take the first step 

towards a new career. 

This legislation has received outside support from Student Veterans of America, Veterans Education Success, The American Legion, and The Retired Enlisted Association. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the entire Veterans Affairs Committee and your team for your work on this important bill. I yield 

back. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Messer. And unless there are 

any questions, I am going to excuse you unless you want to stay 

and listen to the eloquence of Judge Poe. 

Mr. MESSER. Any time I can listen to Ted Poe, I am not going 

to miss that opportunity. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. That is what I would— 

Mr. MESSER. So, I may listen to him and then slide out. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Most people would pay to hear what we are 

about to hear from Judge Poe. 

Judge, we yield 5 minutes to our friend and fellow Texan. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

4 

STATEMENT OF H0NORABLE TED POE 

Mr. POE. I thank the Chairman, Mr. Arrington, and the Ranking 

Member, Mr. O’Rourke, and the rest of the Veterans Committee, 

and I want to discuss legislation H.R. 3940, which the Ranking 

Member is a co-sponsor of, the Veterans Education Disaster Assistance Act. 

I am the son of a World War II veteran. My dad is 93, still very 

active and opinionated, served World War II in Germany and came 

back to Fort Bliss, Fort Polk, and Fort Hood, as well. He benefited 

from the GI Bill. He was not only the first person to go to college, 

he was probably the first person in our family who could spell college. 

And after going to college, he became an engineer and did quite 

well for our family and it is because of the GI Bill. It is one of the 

things that Congress has actually done and done right is the GI 

Bill and it has served our country quite well, like my dad. 

I am also a veteran and I am thankful for what the Committee 

does for our veterans to receive the best possible care, benefits, and 

support after they come back from the battlefield throughout the 

world. 

Six months ago, Hurricane Harvey ravaged a part of Texas, including most of my congressional district; 130,000 structures were 

flooded in my congressional district because of Hurricane Harvey. 

Fifty-five inches of rain in just a few days, and we have had floods 

since then because of Hurricane Harvey and the repairs that have 

not been done, which is another story. 

But anyway, shortly after Hurricane Harvey, Daniel Sublett (ph), 

a constituent and a veteran of the United States Air Force, he was 

attending a local community college in our district, the Lone Star 

College of Kingwood. He sought help from our office. Lone Star College was hit hard by Hurricane Harvey and students could not go 

there for weeks; seven of the nine campuses throughout the Houston area flooded, causing $15 million in damages. Some of those 

campuses have still not reopened because of the damage. 

As a response to Harvey, the school instructed its students to 

take online courses until the school could repair and reopen the 

physical campuses. Most of the campus was able to come back and 

students on September 25th, a month after Harvey was hit, but unfortunately, under the VA’s basic allowance for housing, veterans 

who take online courses are only eligible to receive at most, onehalf of their BAH, when they are taking online courses, as they 

would if they took the courses in person. 

So, because of this, Daniel Sublett, who is also a local Student 

Veterans of America chapter president, and many other veterans 

attending Lone Star College in Kingwood were told by the VA that 

they would only receive one-half of their normal BAH for September and only the month of September. So, in many cases, the 

amount they were told they would receive would not even cover the 

cost of their bills. 

Although Daniel and a handful of other veterans were able to get 

a waiver and receive their full BAH for that month, this is not the 

case for most veterans affected by natural disasters. The VA currently has a waiver that allows veterans to receive their full BAH, 

if forced to take online courses for up to four weeks only. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

5 

This legislation extends that waiver to cover an entire semester. 

The reality is that it is not always possible for schools to reopen 

their doors in just four weeks because of a natural disaster. Most 

must—much of Lone Star College Kingwood remained closed until 

at least May of this year. It may not reopen at that point. 

So, because of that, veterans have left the Lone Star College system. They are seeking admittance somewhere else and this legislation allows the VA to extend the waiver for a full semester and not 

just one month of that semester. 

And I will yield back to the Committee, and thank you for your 

support. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Judge. A great story, and God bless 

your dad, and thank you for your service. 

And thank you, the distinguished gentleman from the Great 

State of Indiana for your testimony today and your great ideas and 

for bringing them to the Committee. 

So, you guys—we don’t have any questions, and we will have our 

next panelist come up and we will discuss it later behind your 

backs. Mr. Russell, our friend from Oklahoma, we yield 5 minutes 

for you to talk about your legislative proposal. 

STATEMENT OF HONORABLE STEVE RUSSELL 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the Committee. 

Each year, with the GI Bill, as soldiers and warriors have left 

the service, they try to go get an education. And it should be a 

straightforward system, but as we know, it is full of complication. 

A recent GAO report certainly showed that to be the case. 

Ideally, a soldier would enroll. The institution says, Okay, Russell is enrolling. Money comes to the institution. They go to class. 

They get their college education. The money is paid. Everybody is 

happy. 

It doesn’t always work that way; in fact, if the soldier were to 

not enter a term for whatever reason—maybe he wants to do some 

work or she wants to do something—then the school is still paid 

the money and then you have uncollected funds that have been 

paid out to the institutions or to the veteran himself. Then, if the 

soldier were to drop a class, say, that they are going, and now you 

have got another construct where monies have been paid for a full 

tuition load and instead, it is a partial tuition load, and all of that 

really resolves around how do you recoup it and why should you? 

Now, replete in government, there is nothing in government that 

is so hard we can’t make harder, and we certainly do that with 

fees. I am kind of a fee-hunter, and this is a fee where we somehow 

got the notion that a ‘‘$16 I am going to charge you your money 

back fee’’ that institutions are able to do—$16 fee. 

So, VA calls and says, hey, you paid too much out on Russell. He 

only went to three classes instead of four. And then they say, Okay. 

I will give you your money back, but it is going to cost you $16. 

And we do this to the tune of nearly $13 million in the last statistical year. It is higher now and we don’t know what that figure is. 

Now, the institutions are pretty faithful about returning it back, 

but you would find it surprising, or maybe not, half of all this unleonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

6 

recouped money revolves around 5 percent of institutions. So, it is 

an institutional problem. 

Why should we pay and why should the Government be charged 

to collect something that was already theirs? And we have heard 

things like, well, you know, it is a carrot to try to get them to do 

this and pay back—it only becomes a carrot because it is allowed. 

The issue with this is that if you took the $13 to $15 million it 

takes to recoup $15 million, we could, instead, apply that to the average tuition cost of $15 to $16,000 per warrior, and the net effect 

of that is, you would have 832 more veterans that are able to go 

to school. 

So, how much does that $16 make sense then? And I know I 

won’t get a chance for cross-examination or questions here, but I 

would have loved to have had that opportunity, but I certainly am 

respectful of things here. 

This is the first part of a three-part fix where we are no longer 

allowing institutions to charge the Government to give back what 

is the Government’s money, that was collected from taxpayers for 

the purpose of educating veterans, not for U.S. Trustee the purpose 

of lining administration. 

The first of the fix is eliminate the handling fees, such as this $16 fee. The second would be to require schools to have VA-certified officials. Now, this amendment does not address that; it only 

addresses the first part because this is the low-hanging fruit. Right 

now, the certifying officials are not certified because they can’t be 

compelled, because there is no law that compels them. In many 

other aspects of whether or not they receive are money from other 

programs for educational purposes, they can be compelled and they 

are told to have certain training, so that is part of the fix. 

And the third fix would be require schools to apply for tuition 

payment mid-term, and this, Mr. Chairman, would eliminate 90 

percent of overpay issues. Why? Because, instead, they pay the institutions on the promise that they think the veteran is going to 

go to school. Things may change upon enrollment—enrolling day, 

things my change on the class schedule in the first few weeks. 

So, we could have an actual construct in the three-part fix, and 

more to follow, where at the end of that, then we say, Okay. At 

mid-semester, we are going to charge the Government on Russell 

actually spent and then we don’t play this drill of spending $15 

million to collect $15 million or $13 million to collect $13 million. 

We can’t fix everything, Mr. Chairman, but we can fix $16 fees 

that add up to millions of dollars that could educate more veterans. 

And with that, I yield back. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Russell, for your testimony and, 

again, thank you for bringing that great idea for us to consider as 

a Committee and thank you for your commitment and your service 

to the very best among us, our veterans. God bless you. Thanks for 

your time. 

And now, I will yield to Chairman Wenstrup for 5 minutes to 

talk about his legislative proposal that we will consider today. 

STATEMENT OF HONORABLE BRAD WENSTRUP 

Mr. WENSTRUP. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding. 

And I want to thank Chairman Arrington and Ranking Member 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

7 

O’Rourke for addressing this important bill at today’s hearing. I appreciate it. 

I would also like to thank, in advance, all the witnesses for their 

testimony and sharing their thoughts on this legislation. 

In November of last year, I joined my colleague and the Ranking 

Member of the health Subcommittee, Representative Brownley, in 

reintroducing H.R. 4451, the Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration 

Program’s Reauthorization Act of 2017. This bill would provide 

much-needed services to our veterans transitioning to civilian life 

and ensure that no veteran falls through the unintended legislative 

gaps in programs. 

We do this by ensuring that those eligible for the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development’s Veterans Affairs Supportive 

Housing Program and other housing assistance programs are also 

eligible for the Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program. The gap 

arises because the Department of Labor considers veterans participating in these housing assistance programs to no longer be homeless, and, therefore, ineligible. So, as such, they can’t participate in 

the Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program. 

So, I think you can see the obvious gap that exists here. So, far 

too often, servicemembers face a number of challenges assimilating 

back to civilian life as it is. By prioritizing the reintegration of 

homeless and recently homeless veterans, we will empower our veterans to re-enter the workforce and help them regain self-sufficiency. 

Our veterans, obviously, sacrificed so much for our country, and 

I think it is up to us to make sure they have the tools to succeed 

in civilian life. I am proud of this Committee’s commitment to reducing veteran homelessness and I am eager to hear the witnesses’ 

thoughts on this piece of legislation. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. I thank the gentleman from Ohio, and now I 

yield 5 minutes to Mr. Bilirakis. 

STATEMENT OF HONORABLE GUS BILIRAKIS 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it so very 

much. 

I thank, again, to the Chairman and the Ranking Member, Mr. 

O’Rourke, and all the distinguished Members of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee, and all the Members for allowing me to 

present this afternoon before the Committee. 

I am proud of the work that this Committee has done to ensure 

that we, as a Nation, take care of our true American heroes, our 

veterans, when they return home; specifically, I am proud of the 

work our Committee conducted last year to pass the Harry W. 

Colmery Veterans Education Assistance Act, or the Forever GI Bill. 

This historic legislation expanded access to education and improves 

and modernizes the GI Bill for our veterans. 

But there is always more work to be done for these honorable 

Americans. I also thank the VSOs for their input. In order to give 

the best opportunities to our Nation’s heroes, we must be prepared 

to address new needs as they are identified. 

In December, our Subcommittee had a chance to examine the implementation of the Forever GI Bill. We heard from stakeholders, 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

8 

such as the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, who expressed concern about the delay of payments and processing time 

for GI Bill benefits by both, the school and the VA. I also had a 

roundtable in my district and veterans expressed their concerns, as 

well. I also want to thank the staff for bringing this to my attention here, the Committee’s staff. 

As a result of some of these delays, some schools put on hold, a 

veteran’s account or start focusing the student to begin payment of 

tuition and fees on a payment plan until they receive money from 

VA. TAPS highlighted occurrences at, at least 15 schools and universities across the country. In response to these concerns, I 

worked with the Committee to introduce H.R. 4830, the 

Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act, or the SIT–REP Act. 

My bill would give the secretary the authority to disapprove 

courses of education unless the educational institution adopts a policy ensuring that it would permit student veterans to attend those 

courses beginning on the date in which the individual provides to 

the educational institution, a certificate of eligibility for entitlement to GI Bill benefits. Furthermore, my bill would require that 

in order for a school or a training program to be eligible for a GI 

Bill benefits, the institution must adopt a policy that prohibits 

them from imposing a late fee denying access to education or other 

penalties due to a late payment from VA. 

This policy would only apply if the payments have not been received within 90 days of the beginning of the term. Additionally, 

the secretary would have the authority to waive this requirement 

as he sees fit. 

The SIT–REP Act is a common sense, bipartisan bill that protects student veterans and their families, who through no-fault of 

their own, are denied access to education because the school made 

a mistake or the VA made a late payment. It is not the fault of 

the veteran. Again, I want to repeat that: It is not the fault of the 

veteran. They don’t need that excess stress and they should not be 

punished for the actions of others. 

Mr. Chairman, I have three letters of support for the SIT–REP 

Act: One from the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, one 

from The Retired Enlisted Association, and one from the Student 

Veterans of America, which I would like ask unanimous consent to 

include for the record. I have the three here, right here. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Without objection. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. I promise you they are here, okay. Thank you 

very much. 

In closing, I remain dedicated to ensuring that our Nation’s veterans have access to the important educational benefits they have 

earned and deserve. As these brave men and women fought on our 

behalf, we have a responsibility to do the same by ensuring they 

are harmless—held harmless from bureaucratic penalties and fees. 

Again, this is a common sense bill. You know, we don’t—our veterans, they don’t need this added stress. Let’s take care of this as 

soon as possible. I ask my colleagues to support this beneficial 

piece of legislation and I yield back. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

9 

Mr. ARRINGTON. I thank my friend from Florida and I want to 

say if you got common sense solutions, the EO Subcommittee is the 

place to be, right, Ranking Member? 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Right. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. And I want to thank both, Mr. Wenstrup and 

you, for offering up your ideas to improve services for our veterans. 

And without any further ado—and I don’t believe we have any 

questions for our colleagues—let’s go to our second panel of witnesses today. So, if you guys would please take your seats, we will 

give you just a minute, here. 

Let me go ahead and make the introductions as you are getting 

situated. We want to welcome back General Rob Worley, Director 

of VA’s Education Service, who is accompanied by Mr. Jeff London, 

Director of VA’s Loan Guaranty Services. I also want to welcome 

back Mr. John Kamin, Assistant Director of Veteran Education and 

Employment for The American Legion; Ms. Ashlynne Haycock, 

Manager of Education Services for the Tragedy Assistance Program 

for Survivors; and Mr. Will Hubbard, Vice President of Government 

Affairs for Student Veterans of America. 

Again, thank you guys for being with us today and each of you 

will be recognized for 5 minutes. So, General Worley, we will begin 

with you. 

STATEMENT OF MG ROBERT M. WORLEY, USAF (RET.) 

Mr. WORLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good afternoon, Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member 

O’Rourke, and other Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for 

the opportunity to be here today to provide the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs on pending legislation. With me today, as 

you mentioned, are Mr. Jeffrey London, director of the Loan Guaranty Service and Mr. Tom Leney, executive director of the Small 

and Veterans Business Programs, Office of the Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization. 

Because of the timing of the receipt, we are not able to provide 

formal views on H.R. 1206 and H.R. 3023. We will follow up with 

the Committee soon on these two bills. 

Additionally, there are two bills under discussion today which 

would affect programs or laws administered by the Department of 

Labor. We respectfully defer to that Department’s views on H.R. 

4451 and H.R. 4835. 

H.R. 3940, as you heard, would require the VA secretary to pay 

a monthly stipend to an individual pursuing a course of education 

using the Post-9/11 GI Bill, if that individual is forced to discontinue this pursuit because of the closure of the school due to a 

natural disaster and the individual opts to pursue that course or 

an alternative course of education solely by distance learning. The 

bill would also require VA to pay an additional lump sum amount 

for books, supplies, equipment, and other educational costs. 

Significantly, no charge would be made against the GI Bill entitlement of any individual receiving payment under this legislation. 

VA supports the intent of 3940, however, we have serious concerns with several aspects of the bill related to disparate treatment 

of beneficiaries and we believe the bill needs several clarifications. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

10 

H.R. 4830 would require a State approving agency to disapprove 

programs of education unless the institution has adopted a policy 

allowing the student to attend classes if he or she produces a certificate of eligibility showing entitlement under Chapters 30, 31, 

33, or 35. The institution would also have to adopt a policy not to 

impose any penalty, such as late fees, denial of access to facilities, 

or requiring the student to borrow funds to pay tuition because of 

delayed payments from VA. 

VA supports this bill, as well, but also has some concerns with 

it. VA does not make tuition and fee payments directly to institutions under Chapters 30 and 35; but rather pays the monthly benefit payments directly to the student. Consequently, as currently 

written, individuals entitled to assistance under Chapters 30 and 

35 would always be permitted to attend for 90 days, regardless of 

when VA begins issuing benefit payments in order for the institution to avoid program disapproval. 

H.R. 5044 would allow a surviving spouse of a veteran whose disability rating was less than 100 percent to be treated as a covered 

surviving spouse for purposes of VA contracting goals and preferences for a period of up to 3 years. While VA supports the intent 

of this bill, changes must be made before VA can support it. 

The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2017, will 

amend the relevant provisions in 38 U.S.C. Section 8127 to mirror 

those set forth in the Small Business Act. Accordingly, VA recommends that the proposed amendment be incorporated into the 

Small Business Act. There would be minimal or no costs associated 

with this bill. 

The draft Home Loan Bill would make various changes to VA’s 

Home Loan Program. Section 2(a) of the bill would adjust the maximum guaranty amount under VA’s Home Loan Program. However, 

the uncertainty in budgetary impacts, because of that, VA cannot 

support Section 2(a) at this time. 

Section 2(b) of the bill would change the exemptions permitted 

with regard to VA’s statutory loan fee. Due to the way this provision is drafted, it is unclear to VA which veterans Congress intends 

to exempt from paying the loan fee. 

VA welcomes the opportunity with this and all the legislation— 

the educational legislation, to work with the Committee to make 

sure that your intended outcomes are provided in the language. 

VA supports enactment of Section 3, as it would enable VA-designated appraisers to expand their coverage areas and would increase the number of appraisals they could perform in a timely 

manner. 

This concludes my testimony. We appreciate the opportunity to 

present our views on these bills and we look forward to your questions. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF MG ROBERT M. WORLEY APPEARS

IN THE APPENDIX]

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, General Worley. 

And I apologize, Mr. Kamin, for mispronouncing your last 

name—Kamin—Mr. Kamin, you have 5 minutes. Thank you, on behalf of The American Legion, for joining us today. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

11 

STATEMENT OF JOHN J. KAMIN 

Mr. KAMIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member. 

On behalf of National Commander Denise Rohan and 2 million 

members in The American Legion family, we provide our strongest 

accommodation to the Subcommittee for the extraordinary job it 

has undertaken, honing in on the challenges and solutions to veterans’ successful transitions. 

In just the last 4 months, you have convened roundtables and 

hearings on improving TAP, VA home loans, and tackling veterans’ 

homelessness. And there has never been an echo chamber; you 

have held us all to task, from veterans’ organizations to our government and community partners. 

We will begin with GI Bill and H.R. 4830, the SIT–REP Act. This 

bill would require schools to adopt policies that disallow them from 

imposing late fees or other penalties to beneficiaries due to late 

payments from VA. 

The American Legion applauds Congressman Bilirakis for addressing this important issue. On a personal note, I remember a 

late VA payment when I was in school, being the questions about 

whether I could still attend my classes. My student veterans’ organization at the time, AU Vets, was able to successfully lobby our 

institution to update their internal policies to allow myself and 

other veterans to continue our studies. 

But TAPS deserves credit for championing this bill by recognizing that this should not fault the student veterans, though allowed before; it should be mandated by principle. The American Legion enthusiastically supports passage of H.R. 4830. 

Turning our attention to small business, we have H.R. 5044, the 

Service-Disabled Veterans Small Business Continuation Act. 

Amongst the range of benefits our country has developed to provide 

transition assistance to disabled veterans, has been set aside contract benefits for companies considered service-disabled veteranowned small businesses. 

The 2017 NDAA specifies a surviving spouse may continue to operate a company as an SDVOSB when a veteran dies under certain 

conditions, such as they had a disability rated at 100 percent disabled. H.R. 5044 would expand this criteria to give surviving 

spouses with less than total-disability ratings, the option of maintaining SDVOSB status for three years. The American Legion supports this, as a measure to improve and increase benefits bequeathed to veterans’ spouses upon a veteran business-owner’s 

death. 

And turning to the Transition Assistance Program, we have H.R. 

4835, the Job TOOLS for Veterans Act. This bill would provide a 

new 5-year pilot program and establish 50 centers across the country to expand access to job resources and ensure the Department 

of Labor provides classes with job-training information. 

The American Legion supports this bill, but would be remiss not 

to share concerns on VA’s top applications. In last week’s budget 

testimony, the acting deputy Under Secretary for benefits shared 

that the 2019 budget request to cut $59.3 million from the VR&E 

program due to favorable pricing of Transition Assistance Program 

contract. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

12 

Notwithstanding the question of how precipitous of a drop this 

actually is, we were under the presumption that TAP had been 

moved to the Benefits Administration Service, not VR&E, and 

would appreciate clarification from the VA. It is in this context of 

questions that I would like to provide our feedback on these programs, along with today’s release of the American Enterprise Institute’s report on economic opportunity, transition assistance, and 

the 21st century veteran. 

With the incredible energy that this Subcommittee has invested 

into defining veteran success, I owe you The American Legion’s unvarnished conclusion on the totality of these discussions. Programs 

designed to empower veterans’ abilities will not reach their full potential under the aegis of an administration dedicated to documenting veterans’ disabilities. 

What we risk with the status quo is an Economic Opportunity 

Office encumbered by the premise that it is just another benefits 

delivery system held to comparable standards, as disability compensation. And if we have learned one thing from all of our discussions over the past term, is that these programs have the potential 

to be so much more than benefits. With proper oversight, they can 

be true investments in the future of our country. 

In its limited time, the Office for Economic Opportunity has piloted and demonstrated success for many programs, from publicprivate partnerships for apprenticeships and employment, to the 

creation of VA for Vets and the Veterans Employment Services Office. 

VA’s Center for Verification and Examination [sic] has grown exponentially and creates an extensive database of verified veteranowned small businesses. But, so long as they remain—so long as 

they remain to claims backlog, they always complete for relevance 

and funding. 

The landscape of education benefits has evolved rapidly with the 

implementation of the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act. These improvements have been accelerated immensely by the research that Student Veterans of America has conducted on veterans’ education—most recently with its national Veterans Education Success tracker. 

While their success is rightfully applauded, it should not be on 

the young VSO’s back to prove the success of a VA program as 

monumental as the GI Bill. As the demands for the veterans’ populations change, so must the agency that helps ensure their success. 

As our legislative director, Matt Shuman, shared last week, The 

American Legion believes it is the right—the time is right to consolidate VA’s economic opportunity programs under an Under Secretary for Veterans Economic Opportunity and Transition. 

Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke, distinguished 

Members of this Committee, The American Legion appreciates the 

opportunity to comment on these subjects and I would be happy to 

answer any questions you have. Thank you. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN M. KAMIN APPEARS IN THE

APPENDIX]

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Kamin for your testimony. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

13 

Now, Ms. Haycock, we yield 5 minutes to you. Thank you for 

being here. 

STATEMENT OF ASHLYNNE HAYCOCK 

Ms. HAYCOCK. Chairman, Ranking Member, and distinguished 

Members of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to speak on behalf of surviving families of our 

Nation’s fallen heroes. 

I am the surviving daughter of Army Sergeant First Class Jeffrey Haycock, who died in the line of duty in 2002 and Air Force 

veteran, Nicole Haycock, who died by suicide in 2011. In 2010, I 

was one of the very first recipients of the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John Frye Scholarship, and for that opportunity, I am incredibly grateful to this Committee. 

TAPS would like to thank the Committee for all of the provisions 

in the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act that 

assisted our surviving families, such as Yellow Ribbon for Fry 

Scholarship recipients, the removal of the delimiting date for Fryeligible spouses, and an increase in Chapter 35 educational benefits. 

We look forward to seeing these implemented in the coming 

months; however, with these improvements coming from the Forever GI Bill, we are concerned about potential delays in payments. 

That is part of the reason H.R. 4830, the Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act, or 

SIT–REP, is so important to TAPS. And we are incredibly grateful 

to Representative Bilirakis for introducing it. 

We have already had situations where veterans and survivors 

were forced by many schools to take out student loans, sign up for 

payment plans they could not afford, or require to pay out-of-pocket 

for tuition before the start of the term. These students did everything by the book. They applied for and received a certificate of eligibility. They provided that certificate of eligibility to the schoolcertifying official with proof of enrollment on time, yet, they were 

still penalized because of unfair institutional policies. 

One of these students, Weston, is enrolled at Montana State University. Because the VA paid—tuition payment had not arrived before the start of the semester, the school advised him to take out 

a student loan and repay it when the VA money arrived. They did 

not inform him that there would be thousands of dollars in initiation fees he had to pay back on top of the original loan amount. 

The VA money arrived when it was supposed to; four weeks after 

being certified by the school, but nevertheless, Weston was punished. 

Another student, Timothy, started his first semester at Blinn 

College in College Station, Texas, in January 2018. Timothy was 

raised by his grandparent after the loss of his father in the Army 

in 2004. He transferred to Blinn after his grandfather had some 

medical issues so he could be closer to home. 

Timothy provided Blinn with his COE the day he enrolled in 

classes, yet his grandparents were still forced to pay out-of-pocket 

that day, while awaiting VA payment. This payment put such a 

strain on the family’s finances that they were late on other bills 

that month. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

14 

Then we have Eucenia (ph), a surviving spouse who is enrolled 

at a small, private university, Aurora College, in Illinois. Eucenia 

did not pay out-of-pocket or take out loans up front for her tuition, 

but because of when the VA payment arrived, she was forced to 

pay late fees on top of her constitution. When she confronted the 

school about it, they told her it was not their problem. 

These are just some of the examples we have heard. None of 

these examples came from delayed payments, just unfair institutional policies. Imagine how many more there could be if payments 

end up being delayed with the implementation of the changes from 

Forever GI Bill. 

SIT–REP does nothing more than make a certificate of eligibility 

a promise of payment. It prevents schools from punishing students 

using the Post-9/11 GI Bill, Fry Scholarship, and VocRehab for the 

complications of bureaucracy. It prevents military-connected students from taking out unnecessary student loans, incurring late 

fees, and being financially burdened by forcing them to pay out-ofpocket. 

These policies are already in place for students using Title IV 

funds, such as Pell Grants and Federal student loans. We view this 

as a straightforward common sense bill, just like the guaranteed 

in-state tuition laws passed in 2016 by this Committee. 

While TAPS’ priority here today is H.R. 4830, we would also like 

to express our support for H.R. 1206 to assist with application fees; 

H.R. 3940, to assist veterans and survivors impacted by natural 

disasters, and the draft text to create a fourth administration for 

economic opportunity. 

We are, however, concerned with H.R. 3023, which eliminates reporting fees, as this does away with some of the important gains 

from Forever GI Bill. 

Veterans and survivors have already sacrificed so much for this 

country. Simplifying access to higher education for them is something we can easily document. 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this important issue, 

and I look forward to answering any questions that you may have. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF ASHLYNNE HAYCOCK APPEARS IN

THE APPENDIX]

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Ms. Haycock. 

Now, Mr. Hubbard, I will yield 5 minutes for your remarks. 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM HUBBARD 

Mr. HUBBARD. Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke, 

and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting Student 

Veterans of America to submit our testimony on the pending legislation before this body today. With over 1500 chapters representing 

more than 700,000 veterans and schools across the country, we are 

pleased to share the perspective of those directly impacted by the 

subjects before this Committee. 

Many of the topics under consideration focus on the issues of 

transition, education, and employment. Before delving into these 

topics, we would like to address the ongoing situation with Ashford 

University. At this time, it is unclear what the Department of Vetleonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

15 

erans Affairs, in conjunction with the state-approving agencies, intend to conclude regarding the case. 

At present, Ashford effectively has no current approval for GI 

Bill funds while the school continues to seek approval in several 

states, including Arizona and California. As the situation remains 

unclear, we support the intent of VA, at minimum, to stop new enrollments of GI Bill students until the situation is resolved. 

Historically, we have provided direct support to student veterans 

and their families who have been displaced from tenuous education 

situations. Resolving this situation as soon as possible is in the interest of students and all those involved. 

As Forever GI Bill implementation is ongoing, we recognize the 

constraints on the VA, the education service staff specifically, and 

we applaud Director Rob Worley and his team for the incredible 

commitment to the implementation of this historic legislation, as 

well as the other economic opportunity programs. Our full review 

of the legislation appears in our written testimony. 

VA has stated, ‘‘Economic competitiveness is not just about employment; it encompasses overall employment, wealth, independent 

living, housing, career mobility, and educational attainment.’’ 

Economic opportunity, being a stated priority, we propose the establishment of a veterans economic opportunity administration at 

VA, including the creation of a new political appointment for an 

Under Secretary of veterans economic opportunity. Responsibilities 

would be include the administration of the home loan, Vocational 

Rehabilitation and Employment, or VR&E, education assistance 

programs, and transition issues. 

This proposal would have a laundry list of much-needed outcomes. First, it increases accountability. As of this hearing, it has 

been 886 days since VA last had a permanent Under Secretary of 

benefits. As of today, VA has no permanent leadership overseeing 

these important issues. 

Second, it elevates economic opportunity for veterans. It is directly relevant to President Trump’s Executive Order 13822, supporting our veterans during their transition from uniformed services to civilian life. This proposal supports the importance of transition, education, employment, and well-being. 

Third, it reduces bureaucracy, which has historically led to serious national challenges. Keeping economic opportunity issues buried at the bottom of the Veterans Benefits Administration is not 

the answer. As of last week’s budget hearing, the lack of a clear 

response on several basic questions regarding multiple economic 

opportunity programs at VA was a direct result of a structure not 

functioning to benefit the end-user. 

Take a look at the current structure. It is no wonder that economic opportunity programs are taking a backseat at VA, and that 

is just one lane within VA. At the bottom you will see GI Bill listed. It is pretty clear that this is not a structure that is set up to 

support the veteran. 

Fourth, it establishes a counterpart for the Departments of Defense and Labor. Presently, these Departments lack a direct Under 

Secretary counterpart within VA and any significant initiative 

must achieve multiple layers of approval before moving ahead. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

16 

Fifth, it supports whole health. A tragically elastic narrative exists around veterans as either broken or damaged. In reality, the 

vast majority of veterans are much like many Americans: hardworking, community-oriented neighbors who want what is best for 

their families. 

Unfortunately, programs that support the whole health of veterans are not reaching their full potential under this current structure at VA. Disappointingly, it appears that the maintenance of the 

bureaucracy is the chief concern for those who are opposing this 

proposal; placing an emphasis on preserving the way things are for 

the sake of doing so versus the prioritization of the customer, veterans. 

A long list of traditional and Post-9/11 military and veteran service organizations have supported this concept in the past and continue to do so today. Future generations of veterans are counting 

on the success of this proposal and we’re eager to work with this 

Congress, the president, and all others in making this a reality. 

I will leave you with this quote, ‘‘The Nation that makes a great 

distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its 

thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.’’ 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of 

the Committee, for making the success of student veterans and 

their families a top priority in this Congress. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM HUBBARD APPEARS IN

THE APPENDIX]

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Hubbard for your passion for 

our veterans, especially our student veterans, and it is always good 

to see you. 

Now, I am going to begin our Committee remarks and questions 

with my Ranking Member, Mr. O’Rourke. I yield 5 minutes. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Kamin, you had a specific question. You had some uncertainty, I believe on the TAPS program. You wanted a clarification—do you want to re-ask the question and allow Mr. Worley to 

answer. 

Mr. KAMIN. Yes, thank you, sir. The question related to in the 

hearing and also in the budget request for fiscal year 2019, it was 

mentioned that VR&E, in terms of where the budget was dropped, 

the rationale for that was that a new TAP contract could deliver 

better outcomes at a cheaper price. The question we have is, 

what—how—why would a TAP contract have anything to do with 

VR&E, because TAP is under the BAS office, so we want to know 

how that math was crunched to do that. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Okay. General Worley, any light on that? 

Mr. WORLEY. I can’t shed any light on that, Ranking Member 

O’Rourke. That is—we can certainly take that back and try to answer that question. 

It is true the TAP program is managed under the Benefits Assistance Service— 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Yeah. 

Mr. WORLEY [continued]. —and so, that is all I can share at this 

point. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

17 

Mr. O’ROURKE. And just since we have everyone at the same 

table, the question brought up about Ashford College, by Mr. Hubbard, anything you can say about that? 

Mr. WORLEY. I can share a couple of things about the status of 

Ashford University. As you may know, there is a—Ashford filed 

suit against the VA and so, there is ongoing litigation in Federal 

court, so there is probably not a huge amount I can say. But it is 

true that they, through the legal interactions, Ashford did apply for 

approval in the correct state of jurisdiction, which is California. 

They do have, they would argue, an approval status in Arizona and 

in Iowa, for that matter. 

It is a good time to point out that state approving agencies approve programs of education for GI Bill benefits, not the VA, and 

so California has essentially decided not to act on that approval, 

which is tantamount to denying the approval and the VA is currently reviewing—we—and reviewing all the approval documentation to determine the appropriateness of California’s action under 

our contract with them and whether Ashford acted in good faith in 

pursuing that approval. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Let me ask you one more question. Mr. Poe’s legislation to assist those veterans who are living in places like Houston who are still trying to obtain their earned education benefit, despite living through a natural disaster, perhaps their schools closed 

down, you had two concerns. One was disparate treatment and you 

said I—we will need some clarifications. Anything that we can resolve today, as long as we have all parties at the table? 

Mr. WORLEY. Well, we noted that the bill only applies to Post9/11 GI Bill, so there are 5 other benefit programs that we administer. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Could we open it to all 5, and your concern would 

be eliminated? 

Mr. WORLEY. I think they would be subject to the same weather 

and potential closure issues, so if you open it up— 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Yeah. 

Mr. WORLEY [continued]. —that would be helpful. 

It was unclear, with respect to in between terms, whether this 

would apply in between terms of education. And there was also a 

concern related to the books and supplies, because the way we pay 

it now is a flat rate, $1,000 a year maximum. The way this language reads is there is really no maximum, no cap. It is pay for 

whatever is required. 

So, we would suggest that there be a cap or something similar 

to what is in place with the normal program. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Yeah, and I don’t know if Mr. Poe’s team is still 

here or if they are watching, but I would love to work with his office and you and see if we can’t resolve those concerns and get the 

support of the administration, because I think all of us want to do 

this. The intent is the right one and the concerns that you have 

seem legitimate. 

We want to make sure there is not disparate treatment and 

every earned beneficiary is able to get this help. 

Mr. WORLEY. Right. Absolutely. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. So, it seems very reasonable. 

Okay. So, I will ask my team to work with Judge Poe’s team— 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

18 

Mr. WORLEY. I would be happy to work with the Committee on 

that. 

Mr. O’ROURKE [continued]. —and the VA, and I will yield back 

to the chair. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. I thank the Ranking Member. I second his comments on Mr. Poe’s legislative proposal and hope we can find the 

technical remedies for—that would address those concerns so we 

can move it forward. 

And Mr. Rutherford, from the Great State of Florida, I yield 5 

minutes for your questions. And by the way, they called the votes, 

so we got the 15-minute mark. I am going to stay behind and wrap 

up, but you guys can question. 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that, 

and I will be very quick. I just had a couple quick questions. 

The American Legion supports the 1206, Reducing Barriers for 

Veterans Education Act of 2017. This authorizes the GI Bill funding to be used to pay for college application fees. But does anyone 

know—General, maybe you do—how many veterans actually expend all of their GI Bill dollars? Do we know what percentage? 

Mr. WORLEY. It is a very small percentage. I don’t know the level 

of fidelity of our data, but it is in the low single digits, as we understand it today. 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Okay. So, this would be, probably, a full increase in expenditure, because you are actually adding dollars— 

Mr. WORLEY. Correct. There would—and I apologize, we don’t 

have the approved views and costs for that, but we will have that 

shortly to be able to provide to the Committee. 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Okay. Very good. 

And then, finally, on 3023, do we know of any other organization 

that pays for processing to a college? I mean, it seems to me that 

that is in there—that that would be in the college admissions, covered by their fees and other charges within their credit hours. 

Mr. WORLEY. I appreciate the opportunity to address that, Congressman. And while we don’t have the official views on that particular—you are talking about the reporting fee? 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Correct. 

Mr. WORLEY. I just want to clarify what those fees are for. Those 

are authorized and those are based on the number of active beneficiaries at a particular school. And the purpose of those fees are 

to support the school’s certifying officials or other costs, whether it 

be reporting to the VA or other—and that is why they are called 

‘‘reporting fees’’—and what they do is help defray some of the costs 

that the school incurs by being a GI Bill-approved school. 

In many cases, those funds support the school’s certifying officials attending training conferences, which is a hugely valuable 

way to use that money. So, really, those fees are used for those 

kinds of things in support of the veterans program at the school 

and in training with the VA— 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Okay. 

Mr. WORLEY [continued]. —and the state approving agencies, as 

well. 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Anyone on the panel aware of any other organization that gets reporting, but doesn’t pay for it? 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

19 

Mr. KAMIN. Sir, I am not aware, but I think there is a unique 

history when it comes down to reporting fees. Prior to 1976, the 

people who certified veterans were actually employed by the VA; 

somebody who ensured they were on campus and they were going 

to class— 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Right. 

Mr. KAMIN [continued]. —and we still see the vestiges of that 

exist today through the VocRehab program; that is a VA staffer 

who is certifying—they check in on you—all right, great, here’s 

your payment. 

After 1976 with the proliferation of the Vietnam-era GI Bill and 

some other people on campuses, reporting fees were instituted to 

defray costs, so it was a way to cut down on the burgeoning staff 

with the VA by saying, all right, schools, if you can take care of 

this, we will reimburse you for $7 of the time. Since that time, it 

has gone up to $16 and the schools—and with the Forever GI Bill, 

we have actually earmarked those to say these—the money that 

you are getting needs to go directly back into the certifying official 

budget for training purposes and things of that nature. So, it is 

definitely a little bit odd, but— 

Mr. RUTHERFORD. Yeah, okay. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Rutherford. 

Let me follow up on—or follow on some of your questions. And, 

again, guys, feel free to go; they have called the votes. 

But, as a former administrator in a higher-education institution, 

I am always curious about these fees. The universities benefit 

greatly from the GI Bill benefits, the full tuition and fees. They 

build into that, their operating costs, their overhead. 

And I am just having a hard time figuring out why they would need an additional $16 fee. Let me ask you, do you know that the 

Federal student assistance programs in Department of Education, 

Title IV programs, do they also come with an additional reporting 

fee? 

Does—do you—General Worley, maybe you are the best to answer? 

Mr. WORLEY. I’m sorry, I don’t know, Mr. Chairman. I don’t 

know if they— 

Mr. ARRINGTON. I don’t recall that they have an additional offsetting assistance to the university, and in this case—in that case, I’m 

not sure that they are getting the full freight. I think the GI Bill 

is much more valuable to the university. 

So, it may be an oddity in my view, but, again, I haven’t done 

a lot of due diligence. And it seems to me, again, the incentive for 

the institution is to recruit and support veterans because they are 

all about, you know, the students but also the revenue that follows. 

And I just don’t know why you would need the $16 reporting—I am 

calling it ‘‘fee,’’ but support from the Federal Government, from the 

VA, from the taxpayer. 

Any comments, Will, on that? Or anybody on the panel want to 

comment? 

Mr. HUBBARD. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

So, our strong position is that we believe that the schools should 

continue to get the fee. I think, however, schools are making the 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

20 

wrong argument. They are not demonstrating the return on investment with this fee. 

And with the Forever GI Bill, we had to specify what these fees 

needed to be used for, which, in and of itself, I think, demonstrates 

a cultural challenge. Schools, typically, were taking this funding 

and rolling it to a general operating fund, which is not what it was 

intended for. 

And I think if they could demonstrate the value of what these 

fees are providing, for example, allowing them to more effectively 

and efficiently recruit student veterans to their universities, I think 

that would be a strong case and would allow us to understand it 

better. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. See, I think performance-based funding is actually where I would like to go, just to be very transparent. And it 

gets at a lot of my colleagues who aren’t here that expressed—especially Mr. Takano, his concerns, and I think legitimate concerns, 

about predatory practices and some institutions that might be taking advantage of our veterans. 

Again, I think, not only should we—once you get the full tuition 

and fee, which is a heck of a deal for a university, I think the university should compete and compete by building into their service, 

support services for our veterans and anything else that will allow 

the veterans to benefit from—let that market—unleash that and I 

think you will have folks bending over backwards to get our veterans and to support them as non-traditional students. So, I would 

actually go the opposite direction on this. 

But the Messer H.R. 1206, his proposal, I would like your 

thought on that as well, Mr. Hubbard, but anybody can comment. 

It seems to me like if somebody want to use their 36 month of tuition and fees and draw that down and use those resources for application fees and maybe accelerate that you are track to graduating, that is an option and I am all for options and choices for 

our veterans. 

They are responsible. I don’t know another community more responsible to make that decision. Why shouldn’t we give them the 

freedom and the choice to do that? 

Mr. HUBBARD. It is an excellent point, Mr. Chairman. I mean, I 

strongly believe, and as an organization, we have seen instances 

where there are barriers for student veterans to apply to schools. 

Any time we can reduce those barriers, as the name indicates, all 

the better. 

If it is a small, $90 to $100 fee that is preventing somebody from 

going to school, because the reality is when you are an E2 or E3, 

I mean, that is significant money if you have a family to feed and 

you are trying to cover the cost of bills. I mean, that is not insignificant to those individuals. 

So, I think taking the opportunity and allowing those individuals 

the opportunity to go to school, all the better. We fully support this. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. My last question and then we will close—and by 

the way, Ms. Haycock, thank you for your family’s sacrifice for our 

country; we are so grateful. 

And to the line of questions and comments that you had on Mr. 

Bilirakis’ legislative proposal H.R. 4830, Mr. Worley, I recall that 

your processing times were pretty good; like 6 days on average, 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

21 

maybe for supplemental—20-plus days—I think 22, 24 days, 

maybe, on original; is that correct? Do I recall accurately? 

Mr. WORLEY. You have got a good memory, but that was before 

the peak season we just went through. 

The fiscal year-to-date numbers right now are about 22 days for 

originals and 12 days for supplementals. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Okay. 

Mr. WORLEY. That goes up a little bit during peak season and 

now it is coming back down. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Okay. The forever GI Bill, you all have to make 

a lot of accommodations and adjustments in your systems and your 

overall operation to implement it and to execute on it and make 

sure that there aren’t the delays. Obviously, with your average 

time, it would be an outlier to make the 90-day window that is the 

solution that Bilirakis is introducing. 

Do you—how do you feel about where you are in terms of the 

ability to efficiently and effectively execute and implement the GI 

Bill, the Forever GI Bill? 

Mr. WORLEY. Mr. Chairman, we are working very, very hard to 

make sure that there aren’t the delays that have been expressed 

here, especially in terms of, 1 August 2018, when there are 17 

more provisions that go into effect. 

The—so, I am—overall, I am feeling pretty good. We have got the 

IT work going on that will handle the most critical things, as we 

have testified before with respect to housing. We are well under 

way with the planning for the vet tech and the things that happen 

a little bit later. 

But it is true, where we don’t have the IT ready on 1 August of 

2018, we are going to have either workarounds or procedural 

advisories or those kinds of things. Those are being designed now. 

We will be doing the training and we will put those into effect. 

And we have more people coming in, as well, so we will have 

about 200 additional folks to help make sure we try to maintain 

the timeliness we enjoy today. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. I think the Ranking Member’s ride is here, so 

I am going to wrap up. 

So, do you think it is a good stop-gap measure to have that 90- 

day Bilirakis solution? 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Yes or no question. 

Mr. WORLEY. Yes. 

Mr. ARRINGTON. Good. I ask unanimous consent—that was a subtle hint—that written statements from Rep Chabot of Ohio, the Department of Labor, the National Association of State Approving 

Agencies, and the National Association of Veterans Programs’ Administrators be included in the hearing record; without objection, 

so ordered. 

Finally, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on any of the bills under consideration this afternoon. 

Without objection, so ordered. The hearing is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:32 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

(22) 

A P P E N D I X 

Prepared Statement of Robert Worley 

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member O’Rourke, and other Members of 

the Subcommittee. I am pleased to be here today to provide the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on pending legislation, including H.R. 3940, H.R. 

4451, H.R. 4830, H.R. 4835, H.R. 5044, and a draft Home Loan bill. Because of the 

timing of receipt of two of the bills, we are not able to provide formal views in this 

statement on H.R. 1206, Reducing Barriers for Veterans Education Act of 2017 and 

H.R. 3023, to eliminate the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to pay reporting fees to educational institutions, but will follow up with the Committee soon, 

on these two bills. With me today are Mr. Jeffrey London, Director, Loan Guaranty 

Service, and Mr. Tom Leney, Executive Director, Small and Veteran Business Programs, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization. 

H.R. 3940 

H.R. 3940, the ‘‘Veterans Education Disaster Assistance Act,’’ would amend section 3313 of title 38, United States Code (U.S.C.), to add a new subsection (k) requiring the VA Secretary to pay a monthly stipend to an individual pursuing a 

course of education at an institution of higher learning (IHL) using educational assistance under 38 U.S.C. chapter 33, if that individual is forced to discontinue pursuing such course because of the closure of an IHL by reason of a natural disaster 

and the individual opts to pursue that course or an alternative course of education 

solely by distance learning. The monthly stipend that the VA Secretary would pay 

would be the amount to which the individual would be entitled were the individual 

pursuing the course of education at the IHL. New subsection (k) would also require 

the Secretary to pay an additional lump sum amount for any books, supplies, equipment, and other educational costs necessary by reason of pursuing the course or an 

alternative course of education solely by distance learning. The Secretary would pay 

the monthly stipend only for the period of time necessary to complete the quarter, 

semester, term or academic period during which the school closure occurs or 4 

months, whichever is shorter. Moreover, the Secretary would only pay the monthly 

stipend to an individual when an IHL closes by reason of a natural disaster for a 

period of time that the institution confirms will last for 4 weeks or longer or that 

the institution describes as indefinite and that endures for a period of 4 weeks or 

longer. No additional charge would be made to entitlement by reason of a payment 

under subsection (k). 

VA supports the intent of this bill to provide additional support to Post-9/11 GI 

Bill beneficiaries during school closures caused by natural disasters; however, VA 

has serious concerns with certain aspects of the bill. 

By amending chapter 33, the bill would apply only to Post-9/11 GI Bill beneficiaries, creating disparity between these beneficiaries and beneficiaries using other 

benefits, such as the Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance program 

benefits under chapter 35. 

Section 3680(a) of title 38, U.S.C., authorizes VA to continue paying allowances 

for a student’s ‘‘enrollment in, and pursuit of’’ a program of education during a temporary school closure caused by an emergency situation. The bill is not clear as to 

whether VA would be required to pay students who are between terms at the time 

of the closure. Also, specific language should be included to indicate whether VA 

would be required to pay the monthly stipend to the same students it pays under 

section 3680(a). 

Under 38 U.S.C. § 3313(c)(1)(B)(iv), VA pays a ‘‘lump sum amount for books, supplies, equipment, and other educational costs’’ subject to a $1,000 cap. VA does not 

currently take into account the actual costs of books, supplies, and equipment, but 

determines the appropriate amount by pro-rating the maximum annual amount of 

$1,000 per academic year based on the student’s rate of pursuit per semester or 

term (VA pays the student $41.67 per credit hour, which is $1,000 divided by 24 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

23 

credit hours, which is the annual credit load for a full-time, semester-based student). In contrast, proposed section 3313(k)(1)(B) would require VA to pay for ‘‘necessary’’ books, supplies, equipment and other educational costs and does not include 

a cap. VA interprets the bill to require a direct-cost reimbursement for actual expenses without any capped maximum amount, which would be challenging for several reasons. VA does not currently pay GI Bill beneficiaries directly for the reimbursement of the actual cost of books, supplies, and equipment. Changes would be 

required to the Long Term Solution system to process payment of this benefit. In 

addition, because the bill would not impose a maximum benefit amount or otherwise 

limit what equipment and educational costs can be included, VA cannot estimate 

the potential cost. Therefore, we recommend including a maximum annual amount 

pro-rated based on a student’s academic rate of pursuit or an authority to exceed 

the current cap amount by some statutory formula rather than a direct-cost reimbursement. 

School closure is described in proposed section 3313(k)(4) as one that is either confirmed by the institution to last 4 weeks or longer or is described by the institution 

as indefinite and actually does last for 4 weeks or longer. However, the bill provides 

no guidance as to what happens if a closure that is described as indefinite does not 

last for 4 weeks and the school reopens prior to the 4 weeks. We also note that a 

school closure could detrimentally affect eligible individuals through non-natural 

causes as well, and a major disaster can also be declared as a result of a fire, flood, 

or explosion regardless of cause. (See Stafford Act § 102(2) (41 U.S.C. 5122(2))). We 

would be happy to work with the Committee on drafting language to address these 

issues, including whether they’d like to expand assistance for non-natural disasters. 

H.R. 4451 

H.R. 4451, the ‘‘Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Programs Reauthorization Act 

of 2017,’’ would extend the authorization of appropriations for the Department of 

Labor’s Homeless Veteran Reintegration Programs (HVRP) and the Homeless 

Women Veterans and Homeless Veterans with Children Reintegration Grant Program from 2017 to 2022. The bill would further expand the population eligible to 

receive services under HVRP to include not only homeless Veterans, but also Veterans who are participating in the Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentVA Supportive Housing program, receiving assistance under the Native American 

Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, transitioning from incarceration, or participating in the VA rapid rehousing and prevention program authorized in 38 U.S.C. § 2044. 

VA defers to the Department of Labor for views and costs on H.R. 4451; however, 

we offer that this bill would provide additional services for homeless and at-risk 

Veterans in the critical area of employment, which is a key factor in achieving and 

maintaining stability in permanent housing. Veterans transitioning from incarceration often face multiple barriers to successful reentry, and expanding HVRP eligibility to this population would help address the employment-related needs of a population of Veterans who are often at high risk of becoming homeless. It would also 

be especially helpful for Veterans transitioning from incarceration who may not be 

eligible for VA services. We also note, as a technical matter, that 38 U.S.C. §§ 

2021(e)(1)(F) and 2021A(f)(1), were already extended through 2018 by sections 301 

and 302 of Public Law 115–62, the Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2017. 

H.R. 4830 

H.R. 4830, the ‘‘Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act’’ or the ‘‘SIT–REP Act,’’ would amend 38 U.S.C. § 3679 by adding 

a new subsection (e) that would require a State Approving Agency (SAA), or the Secretary when acting as an SAA, to disapprove certain courses of education unless an 

educational institution has adopted certain policies. Beginning on August 1, 2018, 

in order to avoid disapproval of a course of education, an educational institution 

would have to have a policy in place that allows a covered individual to attend or 

participate in a course of education if the individual provides a certificate of eligibility for entitlement to educational assistance under chapter 30, 31, 33 or 35. The 

policy would have to permit any covered individual to attend or participate in the 

course of education beginning on the date the individual provides the certificate of 

eligibility until the earlier of the date VA provides payment to the educational institution or 90 days after the date the individual provides the certificate of eligibility. 

In addition, the educational institution would also have to adopt a policy not to 

impose any penalty, including the assessment of late fees, deny access to classes, 

libraries, or other institutional facilities, or require a covered individual to borrow 

additional funds, if the individual cannot meet his or her financial obligations to the 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

24 

institution because of delayed payments for educational assistance from VA. In addition, the bill would allow the Secretary to waive any of these requirements. A covered individual is defined as any individual who is entitled to educational assistance 

under chapter 30, 31, 33, or 35 of title 38, U.S.C. 

VA supports the bill, but has concerns. The proposed legislation would allow a 

covered individual to attend school beginning on the date the individual provides 

a certificate of eligibility until the earlier of the date VA provides payment for the 

course of education to the educational institution or 90 days after the individual provides a certificate of eligibility. Under chapters 31 and 33, VA issues payments for 

tuition and fees directly to the school on behalf of the student. However, VA issues 

a monthly benefit payment directly to the student for individuals eligible for educational assistance under chapters 30 and 35. As such, VA is not responsible for the 

tuition and fees paid to the educational institution for the individual’s attendance 

in any specific course under these programs. Consequently, as currently written, individuals entitled to assistance under chapters 30 and 35 would always be permitted 

to attend for 90 days, regardless of when VA begins issuing benefit payments, in 

order for the institution to avoid program disapproval. 

Benefit costs or savings that would be associated with this bill have not yet been 

determined. 

H.R. 4835 

H.R. 4835, the ‘‘Job Training through Off-Base Opportunities and Local Support 

for Veterans Act’’ or the ‘‘Job TOOLS for Veterans Act,’’ would extend the pilot program for off-base transition training for Veterans and spouses, as established under 

the Dignified Burial and Other Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2012, Pub. 

L. No. 112–260, § 301 (10 U.S.C. § 1144 note). VA defers to the Department of 

Labor on this bill. 

H.R. 5044 

H.R. 5044, the ‘‘Service-Disabled Veterans Small Business Continuation Act,’’ 

would add a new sentence to 38 U.S.C. § 8127(k)(3) stating that a surviving spouse 

of a Veteran whose disability rating was less than 100 percent shall be treated as 

a covered surviving spouse for purposes of VA contracting goals and preferences for 

a period of up to 3 years. While VA supports the intent of this bill, changes must 

be made before VA can support the bill. The National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 (the ‘‘2017 NDAA’’), once effective, will amend the relevant 

provisions in 38 U.S.C. § 8127 to mirror those set forth in section 3(q) of the Small 

Business Act (15 U.S.C. § 632(q)). Accordingly, VA recommends that the proposed 

amendment be incorporated into section 3(q) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

§ 632(q)). Given the language of the 2017 NDAA, any change to the Small Business 

Act would automatically apply to 38 U.S.C. § 8127 and maintain a uniform definition of the relevant terms. 

VA is strongly in favor of creating unified ownership and control provisions for 

Veteran-owned businesses; and the movement of these criteria from 38 U.S.C. § 

8127 to the Small Business Act helps to bring that to fruition. Making changes only 

to 38 U.S.C. § 8127 would create disparate criteria for the VA and Small Business 

Administration (SBA) set-aside programs. To preclude such disparate criteria and 

ensure a single, Government-wide rule, the 2017 NDAA will additionally prohibit 

VA from promulgating its own new regulations related to the status of a concern 

as a small business concern by requiring VA to follow SBA regulations. Accordingly, 

though the bill would amend 38 U.S.C. § 8127, other provisions of that statute, as 

amended by the 2017 NDAA, would preclude VA from issuing regulations to implement this statutory change. 

There would be minimal or no costs associated with this bill. 

Draft Home Loan Bill 

This draft bill, the ‘‘VA Home Loan Improvement Act of 2018,’’ would make various changes to VA’s Home Loan program. 

Section 2(a) of the bill would amend 38 U.S.C. § 3703(a)(1) to adjust the maximum guaranty amount under VA’s Home Loan program. Under current law, the 

maximum guaranty amount is calculated as a percentage of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit. Since lenders require VA’s guaranty to cover at least 25 percent 

of the loan amount before they will make a loan, VA-guaranteed loans are effectively capped at the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit, which varies by location. 

This legislation would eliminate the effective cap and make the maximum guaranty 

amount 25 percent of the loan amount, subject to previously used entitlement. 

The current effective loan limit prevents otherwise qualified Veterans from taking 

full advantage of VA-guaranteed home loans on high-cost properties and requires 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

25 

complicated calculations to determine the maximum guaranty amount. This draft 

bill would make the full VA home loan benefit available to more Veterans and simplify the maximum guaranty calculation for both Veterans and lenders. The nodown payment requirement has been a cornerstone of VA’s Home Loan program and 

provides an incentive for Veterans to choose VA’s home loan product. However, 

under current law, a Veteran who elects to purchase a home for an amount that 

exceeds the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit is required to make a down payment 

for the loan amount borrowed in excess of such limit. This is because lenders generally expect VA’s guaranty to be an amount that is at least 25 percent of the loan. 

If it is not, lenders require Veterans to make a down payment to cover the difference. By removing the effective cap, the law would allow more Veterans to utilize 

the home loan benefit they have earned without a down payment, while still requiring that they have satisfactory credit and income to qualify for the loan. 

However, due to the limitations of VA’s loan data and the various interactions 

with other Federal programs, VA estimates the costs of section 2(a) could be tens 

of millions of dollars (or more) and vary by orders of magnitude due to factors such 

as take-up rates and funding fee collections. Given the uncertainty of the budgetary 

impacts, VA cannot support section 2(a) at this time. 

Section 2(b) of the bill would amend 38 U.S.C. § 3729(c) to change the exemptions 

permitted with regard to VA’s statutory loan fee. VA is required generally, pursuant 

to section 3729, to charge borrowers a statutory loan fee for obtaining a VA-guaranteed loan. Under section 3729(c), certain borrowers with service-connected disabilities, and certain surviving spouses of such borrowers, are exempt from having to 

pay the fee. The bill would amend section 3729(c) to state that the loan-fee exemption currently available under section 3729(c)(1) ‘‘shall not apply to any Veteran 

with a service-connected disability rated as total, or any surviving spouse of such 

a Veteran, who, after October 1, 2018, receives a loan that is guaranteed under section 3710 of this title in an amount that is more than 25 percent of the Freddie 

Mac conforming loan limit limitation.’’ Due to the way this provision is drafted, it 

is unclear to VA which Veterans Congress intends to exempt from paying the loan 

fee. VA welcomes the opportunity to work with the Committee to ensure that section 

2(b) of the bill would achieve the Committee’s intended outcome. 

VA notes that lenders will need a transitional period to incorporate any changes 

into their systems, processes and procedures. VA may also need to establish policy 

guidance and conduct rulemaking, to ensure proper loan processing and calculation 

of available entitlement, in line with the bill’s proposed amendments. VA cannot estimate the benefit costs or savings that would be associated with enactment of section 2(b) of this bill. 

Section 3 of the bill would amend section 38 U.S.C. § 3731(b) by adding a new 

paragraph (3) to authorize VA-designated appraisers to rely solely on information 

provided by third parties when valuing properties for VA’s Home Loan program. VA 

supports enactment of section 3, as it would enable VA-designated appraisers to expand their coverage areas and would increase the number of appraisals they could 

perform in a timely manner. 

The bill would not change the qualifications for VA-designated appraisers, nor 

would it make any substantial change to VA oversight requirements. It would, however, better align VA appraisal policy and procedures with industry standards, address recent industry concerns regarding timely delivery of the VA appraisal product, and likely encourage more use of the VA Home Loan program by making VA 

financing a more attractive option within the mortgage industry. 

VA estimates that there would be no benefit costs or savings associated with enactment of section 3 of this bill. 

This concludes my testimony. We appreciate the opportunity to present our views 

on these bills and look forward to answering any questions the Committee may 

have. 

f 

Prepared Statement of John Kamin 

Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke, and distinguished members of 

the Subcommittee; On behalf of our National Commander, Denise H. Rohan, and 

the over 2 million members of The American Legion, we thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding The American Legion’s positions on pending legislation 

before this Committee. Established in 1919, and being the largest veteran service 

organization in the United States with a myriad of programs supporting veterans, 

we appreciate the Subcommittee focusing on these critical issues that will affect veterans and their families. 

H.R.1206 - Reducing Barriers for Veterans Education Act of 2017 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

26 

1The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and 

Veteran Student’s Education at Institutions of Higher Education 2https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO–16–42 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to include the cost of applying to an institution of higher learning as part of the benefits provided under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program. 

While the Post-9/11 GI Bill provides important educational benefits, the cost of 

applications to colleges, graduate schools, and technical and vocational schools are 

not covered. H.R. 1206, the Reducing Barriers for Veterans Education Act of 2017, 

would allow the Post-9/11 GI Bill to cover up to $750 for applications to colleges, 

universities, graduate schools, as well as technical and vocational schools. 

This is a valuable addition, especially for graduating student veterans who seek 

to continue their studies at the next degree level. Improving the GI Bill to cover 

application costs will provide veterans greater opportunity to help them transition 

from serving our country to earning a degree. 

The American Legion is concerned that the use of this provision for veterans already enrolled in institutions would be an imprudent use of an entire month of GI 

Bill eligibility. If a veteran enrolled at a community college sends applications to 

institutions on four separate months over a semester, an additional four months of 

entitlement would be deducted on top of the months charged for enrollment. Under 

this example, the veteran would stand to lose over 10% of their total GI Bill eligibility months over application fees that would likely cost no more than $500. 

Fortunately, the improvements made to entitlement charges for licensure and certification in Section 107 of the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance 

Act offer a blueprint on how to incorporate these fees. By inserting language that 

would pro-rate the actual amount of application fees relative to the rate of one 

month payable, this proposal can optimize GI Bill usage to provide greater flexibility 

to students who wish to continue their studies. 

Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student’s Education at Institutions of Higher Education supports any legislative proposal that improves education benefits so servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its usage. 1

The American Legion supports HR. 1206, but requests that an additional amendment be made to pro-rate charges to entitlement based on the actual amount of fees 

charged. 

H.R. 3023 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the authority of the Secretary 

of Veterans Affairs to pay reporting fees to educational institutions. 

H.R. 3023 would eliminate the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to 

pay reporting fees to educational institutions, under the premise of cutting cost and 

government waste. This proposal presents an unfortunate lack of understanding of 

both GI Bill oversight and taxpayer stewardship. 

Annual reporting fees originated as a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) cost 

saving initiative, and continue to operate as such. Prior to 1976, the VA employed 

staff at institutions of higher learning (IHLs) to report enrollments of veterans and 

their dependents accessing education benefits. After 1976, IHLs began receiving 

compensation for performing this function at a fee of $7 per student, eliminating 

burgeoning VA overhead that accompanied implementation of the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974. In addition to having the net-effect of 

cutting the VA’s budget, reporting fees ensure correct processing of GI Bill benefits 

by developing informed administrative staff at IHLs. 

As the administrative requirements have grown with increasingly sophisticated 

GI Bill improvements, the need for greater institutional oversight has grown. A 

2015 GAO report identified $416 million in Post-9/11 GI Bill overpayments in fiscal 

year 2014. 2 These overpayments can result in a substantial loss of taxpayer dollars 

if not recovered, and create financial hardships for veterans. 

It is this history of veterans education processing - from the Vietnam-era GI Bill 

to the GAO report - that underlines the necessity for effective reporting fees. This 

history informed Sections 113 and 114 of the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act, which increased reporting fees to $16 and mandated training for school certifying officials. Torpedoing these improvements is misguided and 

fiscally irresponsible, resulting in veterans, the Department of Veterans Affairs and 

American taxpayers bearing the damage. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

27 

3The American Legion Resolution No. 333 (2016): Support Increase in Reporting Fees for Educational Institutions 4The American Legion Resolution No. 21 (2016): Education Benefit Forgiveness and Relief for 

Displaced Student-Veterans 

Resolution No. 333: Support Increase in Reporting Fees for Educational Institu- tions supports the continuation of reporting fees at the rate of $16 per student veteran enrolled. 3

The American Legion opposes H.R. 3023. 

H.R. 3940 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for housing stipends and supply 

fee 

payments under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program for individuals affected by extended school closures due to natural disasters. 

According to the GI Bill Comparison tool, over 5,000 veterans attending schools 

at 13 institutions in Houston, Texas may have been affected by temporary school 

closures due to Hurricane Harvey in 2017. To continue their studies, many had to 

take online classes, leaving them with reduced housing allowances and scrambling 

to pay their rent and bills. The Department of Veterans Affairs currently has a 4- 

week waiver that would allow veterans to receive their full Basic Housing Allowance 

despite taking online courses after natural disasters. 

H.R. 3940 extends this waiver to cover the entire semester. As the devastation 

in Houston and surrounding areas showed, this provision would be a critical improvement to the Post-9/11 GI Bill that will allow student veterans impacted by national disasters to continue their education. 

Resolution No. 21: Education Benefit Forgiveness and Relief for Displaced Student-Veterans supports legislation that restores lost benefits to student-veterans attending schools that abruptly shut down. 4

The American Legion supports H.R. 3940. 

H.R. 4451 - Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Programs Reauthorization 

Act of 2017 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for a five-year extension to the 

homeless veterans reintegration programs and to provide clarification regarding eligibility for services under such programs. 

A critical federal program in the fight to eliminate veteran homelessness is the 

Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program (HVRP) within the Department of Labor’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Services (DOL–VETS). HVRP is the most 

effective program available to address homeless veterans’ financial issues by helping 

them obtain gainful employment. HVRP grantees use a case management approach 

to assist homeless veterans, and provide critical linkages for a variety of support 

services available in their local communities. The program is employment focused; 

veterans receive the employment and training services they need in order to reenter the labor force. Direct services include placement in employment, skills training, job development, career counseling, and resume writing. Support services such 

as clothing, provision of or referral to temporary, transitional, and permanent housing, referral to medical substance abuse treatment, and transportation assistance 

are also available. 

Administered by DOL–VETS for over two decades, HVRP served approximately 

17,000 veterans in 2016, with a national placement rate into employment of 68.4 

percent. These men and women find employment at an average cost to the program 

of $2,007 per placement. Both the placement rate and the cost per placement represent improvements over the last several years. Please note - HVRP is the only 

nationwide program focused on assisting homeless veterans to reintegrate into the 

workforce. 

This program is a highly successful grant program that needs to be fully funded 

at $50 million. Currently, HVRP is funded at $45 million. Through 153 relatively 

small investments in community-based partners, HVRP capitalizes on the benefits 

provided by existing service delivery systems nationwide. 

Lastly, reauthorizing this program for another five years will ensure that many 

homeless veterans will receive the necessary attention and assistance needed to obtain meaningful employment, which immensely affects their ability to find financial 

sustainability, while becoming self-sufficient. In addition, this bill allows a window 

of eligibility for those veterans who are rapidly re-housed through SSVF or receive 

a HUD–VASH voucher to use HVRP. This minor change would be extremely helpful 

because if you are housed - a veteran is not technically homeless anymore - consequently, the veteran is not eligible for HVRP. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

28 

5The American Legion Resolution No. 324 (2016): Support Funding for Homeless Veterans 

6The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and 

Veteran Student’s Education at Institutions of Higher Education 7https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IF10347.pdf 

8The American Legion Resolution No. 70 (2016): Improve Transition Assistance Program 

The American Legion supports H.R. 4451 through Resolution No. 324: Support 

Funding for Homeless Veterans, which calls on The American Legion to seek and 

support any legislative or administrative proposal that will provide medical, rehabilitative, and employment assistance to homeless veterans and their families. 5

The American Legion supports H.R. 4451. 

H.R. 4830 - ‘‘Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring 

Progress Act’’ or the ‘‘SIT–REP Act 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the disapproval of any 

course of education for purposes of the educational assistance programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs unless the educational institution providing the course 

permits individuals to attend or participate in courses pending payment by Department, and for other purposes. 

Since the enactment of the Post-9/11 GI Bill, veteran and dependent beneficiaries 

have been subject on occasion to payment delays. As a result of either slow VA processing, mistakes, or tardiness by school certifying officials, some schools have put 

beneficiary accounts on hold or forced them to initiate payment of tuition and fees 

through student loans until payment from VA is received. 

H.R. 4830 would establish that a school or training program be required - in order 

to be eligible for GI Bill benefits - to adopt a policy that disallows them from imposing a late fee, denial of access to facilities, or other penalty on beneficiaries due to 

a late payment from VA. This mandate would mirror the protections that students 

receiving Title IV funding such as Pell Grants and Federal Student Aid receive. 

The American Legion supports H.R. 4830 through Resolution No. 318: Ensuring 

the Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student’s Education at Institutions of 

Higher Education that supports any legislative proposal that improves education 

benefits so servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its usage. 6

The American Legion supports H.R. 4830. 

H.R. 4835 - ‘‘Job Training through Off-Base Opportunities and 

Local Support for Veterans Act’’ or the ‘‘Job TOOLS for Veterans Act’’ 

To extend the pilot program on off-base transition training for veterans and 

spouses. 

The goal of the Department of Labor’s (DOL) Transition Assistance Program 

(TAP) is to ease the adjustment of separating servicemembers during the difficult 

transition from active-duty into civilian life by offering job search assistance, medical/health services, the advising of available benefits, and other related counseling. 

The American Legion believes strongly that TAP represents an important step toward providing transitioning servicemembers with the information they need to become successful and productive members of society once they complete their military 

service. 

In 2012, The American Legion helped push for expansion of TAP to those who had 

already separated from service. In response, Congress passed the Dignified Burial 

and Other Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2012 (P.L. 112–260, Section 301). 

Provisions in this act authorized an Off-Base Transition Training (OBTT) pilot program that would extend the TAP programs to veterans and their spouses in a community-based setting. The law required the pilot program to be established by the 

DOL in a minimum of three states, with selection favoring states with ‘‘high rates 

of unemployment among veterans.’’ DOL ultimately conducted 21, three-day workshops in Georgia, Washington, and West Virginia. Overall course ratings by participants were high. The OBTT pilot program expired in January of 2015. 7

H.R. 4835 would provide for a new five-year pilot program and establish 50 centers across the country to expand access to job resources and ensure DOL provides 

classes with job-training information. The expansion of this program will give our 

veterans and their spouses the support they deserve. 

The American Legion supports H.R. 4835 through Resolution No. 70: Improve 

Transition Assistance Program. 8

The American Legion supports passage of H.R. 4835. 

H.R. 5044 - Service-Disabled Veterans Small Business Continuation Act 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

29 

9https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/114th-congress/house-report/840/1 

10http://smallgovcon.com/service-disabled-veteran-owned-small-businesses/sdvosb-programs2017-ndaa-modifies-ownership-control-criteria/ 11https://www.military.com/money/va-loans/home-purchase/va-loans-have-lowest-foreclosurerate.html 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the treatment of certain surviving spouses under the contracting goals and preferences of the Department of 

Veterans Affairs. 

For a servicemember who suffers a disability while in military service, the U.S. 

Government has deemed it its moral obligation to provide the disabled veteran a 

range of benefits designed to ease the economic and other losses and disadvantages 

incurred as a consequence of the disability. These benefits include government assistance for entering the federal procurement marketplace. One form this takes are 

sets aside contract benefits for companies considered ’Service-Disabled VeteranOwned Small Business (SDVOSB.) 

The 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) makes some important adjustments to the criteria for ownership and control of a service-disabled veteranowned small business. Among other things, the 2017 NDAA specifies that a veteran 

with a permanent and severe disability need not personally manage the company 

on a day-to-day basis and, under limited circumstances, permits a surviving spouse 

to continue to operate the company as an SDVOSB. 9

With regard to the later, the 2017 NDAA states that a surviving spouse may continue to operate a company as an SDVOSB when a veteran dies, provided that: (1) 

the surviving spouse acquires the veteran’s ownership interest; (2) the veteran had 

a service connected disability ‘‘rated as 100 percent disabling’’ by the VA, or ‘‘died 

as a result of a service-connected disability’’ and (3) immediately prior to the veteran’s death, the company was verified in the VA’s VetBiz database. When the three 

conditions apply, the surviving spouse may continue to operate the company as an 

SDVOSB for up to ten years, although SDVOSB status will be lost earlier if the surviving spouse remarries or relinquishes ownership in the company. 10

H.R. 5044 would give the surviving spouse of a service-connected veteran with 

less than total disability rating at the time of death, the option of maintaining 

SDVOSB status for three years. The Spouse must also retain ownership of at least 

51 percent of the company for the duration of the time he/she claims SDVOSB status. 

The American Legion supports H.R. 5044 through Resolution No. 151: Status of 

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Business after the Death of the Veteran Owner 

that supports legislative action that will improve and increase the benefits bequeathed to veteran’s spouses or dependents upon a veteran business owner’s death. 

The American Legion supports HR 5044. 

DRAFT BILL: VA Home Loan Improvement Act of 2018 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to make certain improvements in the laws 

administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs relating to the home loan program of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. 

VA’s Home Loan Guaranty Program has been in effect since 1944 and has afforded over 22 million veterans the opportunity to purchase a home. The 740,000 

VA loans in 2017 were the most in a single year, and up more than 300,000 from 

three years ago. The Washington, DC area has had a 78 percent increase in VA 

loans in the past four years, according to Veterans United Home Loans, the largest 

VA purchase lender in the country. The home loan programs offer veterans a centralized, affordable and accessible method of purchasing homes in return for their 

service to this nation. Past and present statistics released by the Mortgage Bankers 

Association’s National Delinquency Survey show that veterans using VA loans have 

the lowest foreclosure rate in the United States. 11

VA does not set a cap on how much someone can borrow to finance his or her 

home. However, there are limits on the amount of liability VA can assume. The loan 

limits are the amount a qualified veteran may be able to borrow without making 

a down payment. These loan limits vary by county, since the value of a house depends in part on its location. Limits currently range from $453,100 to $679,650. 

Loans above these limits are referred to as Jumbo Loans. 

Currently, a veteran does not have to pay a down payment on the initial VA loan 

below the loan limit for an area. However, under current law, veterans must pay 

a 25% down payment on any amount that exceeds the excess of the local limit. For 

instance, if an eligible veteran wants to purchase a home that costs $650,000 in an 

area of the country with a loan limit of $453,100, they would have to make a down 

payment of $49,225, 25% of $196,900 difference between the loan limit and the price 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

30 

of the home. This can be a significant barrier to veterans purchasing a home 

through the VA home loan program. 

The VA Home Loan Improvement Act of 2018 would eliminate the 25% down payment for Jumbo Loans. Veterans would now only have to pay a VA funding fee on 

the loan, but at a cost much lower than the present down payment. Veterans with 

a service-connected disability rated as total, or any surviving spouse of such a veteran, would be exempt from these under this bill, however. 

It is the sincere desire of The American Legion to see all veterans realize the 

American dream of owning their own home, but real estate prices have rebounded 

since the subprime mortgage crisis, occurring between 2007–2010, and now can far 

exceed the maximum VA loan amount. 

The American Legion supports this draft bill, as currently written, titled the VA 

Home Loan Improvement Act of 2018. 

Conclusion 

The American Legion thanks this Committee for the opportunity to explain the 

position of the over 2 million veteran members of this organization. For additional 

information regarding this testimony, please contact Mr. Jeff Steele, Assistant Director of the Legislative Division at The American Legion, at (202) 263–2987 or 

jsteele@legion.org. f 

Prepared Statement of Ashlynne Haycock 

Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors 

The Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS) is the national nonprofit 

organization providing compassionate care for the families of America’s fallen military heroes. TAPS provides peer-based emotional support, grief and trauma resources, grief seminars and retreats for adults, Good Grief Camps for children, casework assistance, connections to community-based care, online and in-person support 

groups and a 24/7 resource and information helpline for all who have been affected 

by a death in the Armed Forces. Services are provided free of charge. 

TAPS was founded in 1994 by Bonnie Carroll following the death of her husband 

in a military plane crash in Alaska in 1992. Since then, TAPS has offered comfort 

and care to more than 75,000 bereaved surviving family members. For more information, please visit www.TAPS.org. 

TAPS receives no government grants or funding. 

Ashlynne Haycock 

Ashlynne Haycock is currently the Manager, Education Services for the Tragedy 

Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS). Ashlynne was recently appointed to the 

Department of Veterans Affairs Advisory Committee on Education (VACOE). She is 

the surviving daughter of US Army SFC Jeffrey Haycock, who died in the line of 

duty in 2002, and US Air Force Veteran Nichole Haycock, who died by suicide in 

2011. She graduated from American University with a Bachelor’s degree in Political 

Science in 2013. While at American University she was one of the first recipients 

of the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John Fry Scholarship. 

Ashlynne has been involved with TAPS as a survivor for over 15 years. She has 

been on staff with TAPS for four years and was instrumental in creating the TAPS 

Education Support Services program and online education portal. She is an experienced professional in all areas of education benefits for surviving children and 

spouses at the federal, state and private levels. Ashlynne is regularly invited to participate in forums focusing on veteran and survivor education benefits. She has assisted over 1,500 survivors in accessing education benefits worth over $170 million 

in assistance since 2013. Ashlynne was highly involved in growing the TAPS partnership with the Department of Veterans Affairs since 2014 to establish a Memorandum of Agreement, which was expanded in 2017. 

Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke and distinguished members of 

the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, 

the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS) thanks you for the opportunity to make you aware of issues and concerns of importance to the families we 

serve, the families of the fallen. 

While the mission of TAPS is to offer comfort and support for surviving families, 

we are also committed to improving support provided by the Federal government 

through the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA), Department of Education (DoED), state governments and local communities 

for the families of the fallen - those who fall in combat, those who fall from invisible 

wounds and those who die from illness or disease. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

31 

TAPS appreciates the attention the Committee has paid to making sure that veterans and surviving family members have access to quality education. Surviving 

family members using their education benefits often face many of the same challenges facing all students. TAPS is proud to work with other organizations, including the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Veterans Education Success 

and Student Veterans of America, to ensure safeguards are in place to protect all 

recipients of education benefits from the VA and DoED. 

TAPS would like to thank the Committee for all the provisions in the Harry W. 

Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2017 that assisted our surviving 

families, such as Yellow Ribbon for Fry Scholarships recipients, the removal of the 

delimiting date for Fry-eligible spouses and an increase in Chapter 35 educational 

benefits. We look forward to seeing them implemented in the coming months. 

We are most appreciative of the opportunity to comment on and offer our support 

of H.R. 4830, the ‘‘Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act’’ or the ‘‘SIT–REP Act.’’ 

Indicative of the specialized support that TAPS provides is the education portal 

and individualized guidance on education benefits available for the children and 

spouses of America’s fallen heroes. TAPS staff members work with each individual 

to maximize the financial support they can receive to complete their education from 

both government and private agencies. 

TAPS would like to recognize the outstanding support we receive from the VA on 

behalf of the survivors we serve. For several years we have been honored to have 

a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) with the education specialists in the office of 

Economic Opportunity in the Veterans Benefits Administration enabling TAPS and 

the VA to work most efficiently in solving problems that surviving spouses and children encountered while accessing their VA education benefits. This relationship also 

allowed the VA to discover areas where policy or processes could be improved so 

they could serve survivors more effectively. 

The VA Office of Survivor Assistance, including director Moira Flanders and her 

staff, works closely with TAPS to answer questions and concerns that are raised by 

surviving family members. We also appreciate the opportunities provided by the 

DoD/VA Survivors Forum, held quarterly, which works as a clearinghouse for information on government and private sector programs and policies affecting surviving 

families. This is ably facilitated by Craig Zaroff of the VA Benefits Assistance Service. 

TAPS was recently honored to enter into a new and expanded Memorandum of 

Agreement with the VA. This agreement formalizes what has been a long-standing, 

informal working relationship between TAPS and the VA. The services provided by 

TAPS and the VA are complementary, and in this public-private partnership each 

will continue to provide extraordinary services through closer collaboration. 

Under this agreement, TAPS continues to work with surviving families to identify 

resources available to them both within the VA and through private sources. TAPS 

will also collaborate with the VA in the areas of education, burial, benefits and entitlements, grief counseling and other areas of interest. 

Implementation Challenges 

We have heard from many TAPS surviving spouses concerning the implementation of the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2017. While 

they are most appreciative of the enhanced benefit, many have encountered stumbling blocks. 

TAPS’ biggest concern with all the changes being implemented on August 1, 2018, 

is that there will be delayed payments and processing time for payments for veterans and survivors enrolled for the fall 2018 semester. 

Even with the few changes that went into effect in the fall of 2017, TAPS had 

issues with many institutions of higher learning (IHLs) demanding payment from 

the student because of delayed VA payments. Students receiving VA payments were 

not allowed to attend classes, register for Spring 2018 or use campus facilities (library, health center) because the VA payment was delayed. In some cases, students 

were put on payment plans they could not afford or forced to take out student loans 

with egregious origination fees in order to continue their education program. 

TAPS would recommend that students receiving VA payments have the same protections as those who receive Title IV funding such as Pell Grants and Federal student loans. These Title IV students are allowed to attend classes, participate in 

extra-curricular activities and use campus facilities, as long as the IHL knows that 

payment will arrive. 

TAPS strongly believes that the best way to do this is through a legislative 

change. We have been in discussion with the House Veterans Affairs Committee 

(HVAC) majority staff to assist these students. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

32 

After we spoke of our concerns at the House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing 

on the implementation of the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance 

Act of 2017 (the Forever GI Bill), we were pleased when Representative Gus Bilirakis approached us to express his interest in sponsoring this important legislation. 

We worked closely with his staff and the HVAC staff to come up with language that 

would correct this injustice for veterans and survivors using their VA education benefits. 

H.R. 4830 would give the Secretary of Veterans Affairs the ability to disapprove 

any course of education unless the educational institutions providing the course permit individuals to attend or participate in courses pending payment by the VA and 

accept a Certificate of Eligibility (COE) as a promise of payment. 

Survivors Share Their Stories 

Yesenia Bernal, surviving spouse of Army SPC Rudolfo Bernal and student 

at Aurora College 

I was put on a payment plan, made to pay upfront the payments missed and late 

fees. I was refunded the payments but not the late fees at the end of the semester. 

This impacted our budget at home, of course, but we adjusted to make it work. I 

had to pull from other accounts to do so, which generated yet another fee. I am 

blessed to have graduated tuition free, ever grateful for the Fry scholarship. I feel 

like sharing that story sounds ungrateful, because it was the only financial hardship 

I had throughout my school career compared to what other students have to pay. 

However, if I hadn’t had the additional funds to make it work I would have had 

to take the semester off. 

Weston Haycock, surviving child, student at Montana State University 

Weston is enrolled at Montana State University and because the VA tuition payment had not arrived before the start of the semester the school advised him to take 

out a loan and repay it when the VA money arrived. They did not inform him that 

there would be initiation fees he had to pay back on top of the original loan amount. 

The VA money arrived when it was supposed to-4 weeks after being certified by the 

school, but nevertheless Weston was penalized. 

Timmy Swenson, surviving child, student at Blinn College, Texas 

Timmy’s grandmother shares their story: Timmy and I did a visit in April of his 

senior year to Clarendon College. The visit included the finance office. Timmy drove 

up (10 hour drive) on Friday, August 25, the day Houston was beginning evacuations for hurricane Harvey. He was to move into dorm on Saturday, the 26th. Move 

in went well. He was very concerned about what was going on at home. Then, when 

he went to main admin on Monday to check in to begin classes on Tuesday, he was 

informed that he could not attend any classes until monies had been paid. Apparently Clarendon College is too small to have a full time VA advisor. Poor Timmy 

was panicked, but didn’t want to worry us as Harvey was impending! He didn’t 

know what to do, but decided to deplete his saved living expense money to pay his 

tuition. He contacted Ashlynne at TAPS, and eventually was reimbursed. Then, 

mostly due to my husband’s health issues, and being 10 hours away, he transferred 

to a closer college for this semester. Blinn College in College Station, Texas, finally 

allowed him to enroll. He had to make a payment plan again for tuition, which I 

was luckily able to cover the first payment for him. He received reimbursement just 

before second payment was due. Extremely stressful times. If something could be 

done to alleviate these issues for these Gold Star kids, it would sure help! 

Malena Smith, surviving child, Indiana University of Pennsylvania 

This year they decided to change how they would remove the late fees and have 

them not affect you. In previous years I have had to fight them to get the late fees 

and the installment plan taken off of my account by having the military and veteran 

resource center’s director for Indiana University of Pennsylvania get involved and 

settle it with the military person in the bursar’s office who is not that helpful and 

did not want to remove them last spring but did and he said it was a one-time only 

thing to get them removed. The late fee and installment plan is $70. 

The fall is not too much of a problem because of when the bill is due and when 

they receive the money from the government. That being said this past spring was 

different. They began asking for money at the normal time but not enforcing it until 

February. Our documents for how many credit hours we are taking don’t get sent 

in until the end of add/drop period which in the spring is a week after class begins. 

My information was not sent in until the week of the 29th of January if not later. 

It all depends on how long it takes them to get through the others that have to be 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

33 

submitted. I got the confirmation email that said my information was submitted to 

the VA on the 5th of February. Then on the 5th of February I also got an email 

from the bursar’s office regarding my billing statement saying that the money is due 

by the 20th of February. Then the school got paid by the VA on the 9th of February. 

I also received an email on the 9th of February that I have been enrolled in a payment plan and that it’s a one-time installment for the rest of the balance due and 

it has to be paid by the 20th of March. Then on the 10th of February I got another 

email saying that I had been assessed a two payment plan in the amount of $40.00. 

And the two payments are due on the 25th of February and rest of balance on the 

20th of March. It says in the email that if you are contracted to receive a scholarship, VA Benefits or third party payment, the plan and charge will be removed 

when payment is received. It also has a new due date of the 25th of February. 

When I paid the remaining balance on the 12th the payment plan and charge was 

removed without any issue. However I know that this will happen again because 

the office of Military and Veteran Resource Center submits our paperwork to the 

VA. Do I blame them for any of this? No. However I wish that the bursar would 

be able to flag my account or make a note that my money is coming from the VA 

so that this doesn’t happen. Thank you for fighting for us in Congress and wanting 

to pass this law. 

Other Legislation 

We would like to offer short comments on some of the other legislation being discussed at today’s hearing. 

H.R. 1206 

TAPS supports the ‘‘Reducing Barriers for Veterans Education Act of 2017.’’ 

This bill makes an individual who is eligible for educational assistance under the 

Post-9/11 Educational Assistance program eligible for assistance with the fees for 

applying to IHLs. Surviving spouses and children using the Fry scholarship will also 

be eligible for help with these fees. 

H.R. 3940 

TAPS supports the ‘‘Veterans Education Disaster Assistance Act.’’ The horrific 

disasters that impacted so many students this past fall impacted the education benefits of many veterans and survivors. We should do what we can to make them 

whole again concerning their housing stipends and supply stipends. 

H.R. 3023 

TAPS is concerned that eliminating the authority of the Department of Veterans 

Affairs to pay reporting fees to educational institutions will undo the advances 

achieved by the Forever GI Bill. We have heard from our partner organization, the 

National Association of State Approving Agencies (NASAA), and share their concerns that this will reduce the abilities of some institutions of higher learning to 

provide veterans and survivors resources on campuses. 

The Way Ahead 

TAPS would like to reinforce the fact that the more survivors know about their 

benefits, the better they are equipped to make informed decisions. We would like 

to see what the VA’s communication plan is to publicize and inform veterans and 

survivors about changes to their benefits as a result of the Forever GI Bill. 

Those serving our veterans and survivors need to get the word as well. While 

mandatory training for school certifying officials is included in the Forever GI Bill, 

we are concerned about the IHLs being aware of the changes coming in August 

2018. We know that the Office of Economic Opportunity is pushing out information 

to IHLs. We hope there will be coordination within the IHLs so that the person actually talking to the student is aware of the changes. 

Continued cooperation between the VA, the Committee and interested VSOs, 

MSOs and survivor advocates is essential to make the implementation of the Forever GI Bill a success. TAPS will continue to provide feedback to both the VA and 

the Committee on the experience of survivors. 

f 

Prepared Statement of William Hubbard 

Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for inviting Student Veterans of America (SVA) to submit our testimony on the modernization of the GI Bill and other pending legislation. With over 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

34 

1Shane, Leo. Military Times. Report: Young vets are more successful than their civilian peers. 

July 29, 2017. https://www.militarytimes.com/veterans/2017/07/29/report-young-vets-are-moresuccessful-than-their-civilian-peers/ 2 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Education and Training, ASHFORD UNIVERSITY, 

https://www.benefits.va.gov/gibill/ashford.asp. 3 Vasquez, Michael. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Ashford U. faces new setback in battle 

over GI Bill funds. 21 February 2017. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Ashford-U–Faces-NewSetback/242602. 4 Vasquez, Michael. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Inside the Scramble to Save Ashford 

U. Nov 10, 2017. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Inside-the-Scramble-to-Save/241747. 5 Id. 

6 Harry W. Colmery Veterans Education Assistance Act of 2017 §108. Pub. L 115–48. (2017). 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3218. 

1,500 chapters representing the more than 700,000 student veterans in schools 

across the country, we are pleased to share the perspective of those directly impacted by the subjects before this Committee. 

Established in 2008, SVA has grown to become a force and voice for the interests 

of veterans in higher education. With a myriad of programs supporting their success, rigorous research on ways to improve the landscape, and advocacy throughout 

the nation. We place the student veteran at the top of our organizational pyramid. 

As the future leaders of this country and some of the most successful students in 

higher education, fostering the success of veterans in school is paramount to their 

preparation for productive and impactful lives. 1

Edward Everett, our nation’s 20th Secretary of State, and the former President 

of Harvard University was famously quoted as stating, ‘‘Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.’’ While we have the finest military that the 

world has ever known, the sentiment remains; the importance of education to our 

nation’s national security continues to be critical. Today, we will discuss several topics up for consideration in front of this body. 

Many of the topics under consideration focus on the issues of transition, education, and employment. In addition to these topics, we’d like to address the ongoing 

situation with Ashford University. 2 At this time, it is unclear what the Department 

of Veterans Affairs (VA) in conjunction with the state approving agencies (SAA) intend to conclude regarding the case. At present, Ashford effectively has no current 

approval for GI Bill funds, while the school continues to seek approval in several 

states including Arizona and 3California. 4

As the situation remains unclear, we support the intent of VA at minimum stop 

new enrollments of GI Bill students until the situation is resolved. 5 Historically, we 

have provided direct support to student veterans and their families that have been 

displaced from tenuous education situations. It is clear that resolving this situation 

as soon as possible is in the best interest of students and all others involved. As 

Forever GI Bill implementation is ongoing, we recognize the constraints on the VA 

education service staff. 

We also strongly applaud Director Rob Worley and his team for their incredible 

commitment to the implementation of the historic Forever GI Bill legislation and 

other economic opportunity programs. 

H.R. 1206, Reducing Barriers for Veterans Education Act of 2017 

This bill proposes allowing eligible Post-9/11 GI Bill recipients to charge a pro- rated cost of application fees when applying to schools up to $750 to GI Bill entitlement. In some cases, students are dissuaded from attending school due to the cost 

of various application fees. We strongly believe there should be as few barriers as 

possible preventing a student from attending any school of their choosing, and this 

is a common-sense solution that empowers students with the discretion to cover 

these up-front costs. More importantly, the bill proposes pro-rating these charges 

against GI Bill entitlement, thereby allowing the costs to be equally reflected in the 

charge instead of previous methods of charges which cost the student an entire 

month of entitlement. 

The movement towards micro-assessing entitlement for administrative barriers to 

educational success is a positive trend for student veterans and their families, allowing a scalpel approach in covering costs associated with attending school or completing training. For example, the Forever GI Bill signed into law last year included 

provision 108, which afforded students the opportunity to charge a pro-rated amount 

of entitlement to cover the costs of completing certification or licensure tests. 6 We 

appreciate Rep. Luke Messer’s thoughtful approach to this challenge, and the interest in increasing access to the GI Bill for those who earned it. Student Veterans 

of America supports this bill. 

H.R. 3023, To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate. 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

35 

7 Harry W. Colmery Veterans Education Assistance Act of 2017 §304. Pub. L 115–48. (2017). 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3218. 8 United States. Cong. House. Committee on Veterans Affairs. An Update on the Implementation of the Forever GI Bill, the Harry W. Colmery Educational Assistance Act of 2017. Hearings, 

December 12, 2017. 115th Cong. 2nd sess. 9 Baum, S., Lapovsky, L. The College Board. Tuition Discounting: Not Just a Private College 

Practice. (2006) http://www.collegeboard.com/prod—downloads/press/tuition-discounting.pdf 10Westervelt, Eric. National Public Radio Education. For-Profit colleges seeking veterans’ GI 

Bill dollars aren’t always the best fit. 29 January 2017. https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/01/ 

29/464579497/veterans-to-higher-ed-big-room-for-improvement. 11 Institute for Veterans and Military Families, Student Veterans of America. I am A Post9/11 Student Veteran. (2017). https://ivmf.syracuse.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/I–AM–APOST–911–Student-Veteran-REPORT.pdf 12 Institute for Veterans and Military Families, Student Veterans of America. Student Veterans: A Valuable Asset to Higher Education. (2017). https://ivmf.syracuse.edu/wp-content/ 

uploads/2017/09/Student-Veterans—Valuable—9.8.17—NEW.pdf 13Fain, Paul. Inside Higher Ed. Southern California Wildfires Threaten Colleges. 7 December 

2017. https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/12/07/southern-california-wildfires-threaten-colleges 14 Roll, Nick. Inside Higher Ed. Texas Colleges Brave Harvey. 28 August 2017. https:// 

www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/08/28/texas-colleges-cope-hurricane-harvey 

This bill proposes termination of the reporting fee associated with the Post-9/11 

GI Bill intended to defray the costs of processing payments for student tuition. The 

Forever GI Bill raised the reporting fee to $16 per student to more accurately reflect 

the resources needed for school certifying officials (SCO) on campuses to certify the 

enrollments of GI Bill users. 7 Congress has functionally used this fee as a checking 

account since the passage of the Post-9/11 GI Bill in 2008, with the fee rising or 

falling in accordance with the prioritization of other costs associated with the GI 

Bill. While we see this fee as a critical component of the administration of the GI 

Bill, we also appreciate the fact that constrained fiscal circumstances require a hard 

look at all costs across the federal budget. Understanding the return on investment 

of finite and valuable taxpayer dollars is of critical importance. 

To quote House Veterans Affairs Committee Subcommittee Chairman Jodey 

Arrington, ‘‘It’s not just about inputs and outputs, but most importantly-outcomes.’’ 8

As such, the outcomes for schools in the case of student veterans is a clear issue. 

Students typically pay some level of a ‘‘discount rate’’ when they cover the cost of 

tuition. 9 In fact, GI Bill users are largely the only student population still paying 

the full cost of attendance. Universities that understand this business opportunity 

tend to recruit student veterans in droves; while some of these schools take this recruitment to an extreme level employing predatory practices, good schools ought to 

recognize the business value of recruiting GI Bill users whether there is a reporting 

fee, or not. 10 We strongly oppose the removal of this fee, which mitigates the cost 

of processing GI Bill payments. However, we also recognize the inherent value of 

student veterans to any campus 11community. 12

H.R. 3940, Veterans Education Disaster Assistance Act 

This bill seeks to address an unfortunate but painful reality that natural disasters 

will interrupt the education of some student veterans as they seek degrees and credentials. Most recently, wildfires in California and Hurricane Harvey in Texas that 

greatly affected schools and student veterans experienced this serious challenge 

13first-hand. 14 This bill would provide housing stipends and supply fee payments 

for Post-9/11 GI Bill users affected by extended school closures caused by natural 

disaster, specifically those students forced to discontinue studies due to a school closure if students choose to pursue course of education solely by distance learning or 

an alternative course of education by distance learning. GI Bill users would be afforded a monthly stipend for an amount they would be entitled to if pursuing education at the school and an additional lump sum for books, supplies, equipment, and 

other necessary education costs to avoid a break in their education. 

The duration of this solution would cover costs of up to a period of four months, 

and no additional charge would be made to the student’s entitlement. When natural 

disaster strikes, the last thing student veterans should worry about is their opportunity to properly complete their education, and the resources afforded to make that 

possible. We applaud Rep. Ted Poe for hearing the voices of student veterans in 

Texas, as our chapters brought these concerns to the forefront of policy in 2017. Student Veterans of America strongly supports this bill, and we appreciate the dedication to addressing the challenges related to education in light of an otherwise tragic 

crisis. 

H.R. 4451, Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Programs Reauthorization Act 

of 2017 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

36 

15Title 38 USC Section 2021, added by Section 5 of Public Law 107–95, the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001, https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ95/PLAW– 

107publ95.pdf 16 U.S. Department of Labor, Veterans’ Employment and Training Service. HOMELESS VETERANS’ REINTEGRATION PROGRAM. https://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/hvrp/ 17 Avar Consulting, Inc, U.S. Department of Labor. Formative Evaluation of the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program. (Sept. 2016) https://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/completed-studies/ 

Formative—Evaluation—of—the—Homeless—Veterans—Reintegration—Program—Report.pdf 18 Id. 19 Veterans of Foreign Wars. FINANCIAL GRANTS. https://www.vfw.org/assistance/financialgrants 20 National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV). http://www.nchv.org 

This bill proposes a five-year extension of the homeless veterans’ reintegration 

program, and also provides clarification regarding eligibility for program services. 

The program is currently authorized by law, with the executing agent as the Department of Labor Veterans Employment and Transition Service (DoL VETS) program. 15 Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program (HVRP) grantees provide a core 

set of services determined by the needs of veterans, the employers in the area, and 

the local labor market. Services are focused on providing veterans experiencing 

homelessness with relevant skills, connecting these veterans to employers, and improving employment outcomes and earnings for veterans while they are enrolled. 

The program has a broader focus beyond just online job applications, with an emphasis on quality placements and sustained retention. HVRP achieves this through 

four core activities including outreach, assessment and intake, job-driven training 

and employment, and follow-up services. 16 Grants under this program are awarded 

on a competitive basis to eligible applicants such as state and local Workforce Investment Boards (WIB), non-profit organizations, commercial entities, and others. 17

Program outcomes as cited in the program evaluation demonstrate that nearly twothirds of all program participants are placed into employment, enabling them to 

break the cycle of homelessness. 18

The unfortunate truth is that some student veterans face hurdles in affording 

housing, or have inconsistent housing options. Over the past several years, a number of student veterans have reached out to our organization for support with their 

housing situation, in some instances after the individual was already in need of 

emergency support. While homelessness is not a core competency of Student Veterans of America, we always seek to support student veterans in any way possible, 

to include connecting homeless veterans with our partners with expertise in supporting these issues. 

In these instances, we have referred cases to our friends at the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) and the American Legion. Both organizations have emergency 

funds to address such situations; I’d like to highlight the VFW’s ‘‘Unmet Needs’’ program, which has been particularly impactful. 19 We have also worked closely with 

the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV) and their incredible team 

with a nation-wide network of homeless resources. 20 Homelessness among student 

veterans is often overlooked due to the assumption that all student veterans have 

the GI Bill to cover the cost of their housing. 

There are numerous reasons that a student veteran does not have GI Bill benefits 

eligibility despite the false myth that ‘‘all veterans go to school for free’’ including: 

those who have expended their GI Bill, student veterans with families and other financial obligations, students without full or any GI Bill eligibility due to Guard or 

Reserve status, or those without GI Bill eligibility due to discharge or otherwise 

legal status. Student Veterans of America believes no veteran should ever be homeless, and recognizes homelessness broadly as a national tragedy. We thank Rep. 

Brad Wenstrup for identifying the need for extending this program, and strongly 

support this bill. 

H.R. 4830, SIT–REP Act 

This bill proposes requiring schools that accept VA education dollars to adopt veteran-friendly policies that prevent discriminating student veterans and their families due to payment issues from VA. The bill would disapprove any school that fails 

to adopt policies that (1) permit covered individuals to attend institution after providing a certificate of eligibility for entitlement to education benefits under Chapters 

30, 31, 33, or 35 until institution receives payment for course or 90 days after certificate of eligibility provided; and (2) prohibit institutions from imposing any penalty, including late fees, denial of access to classes, facilities, etc., or requirement 

that the individual borrow additional funds due to delayed benefit disbursement. 

Schools may view payments from GI Bill students as delayed, and thereby require 

students to take out unnecessary loans or assess unfair late fees, while the timing 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

37 

21 Haycock, Ashlynne. Testimony for Hearing on the Topic of ‘‘Pending Legislation.’’ March 20, 

2018, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittees on Economic Opportunity. 22 Augustine, Lauren. Testimony for Legislative Hearing on the Topic of ‘‘U.S. Department of 

Veterans Affairs Fiscal Year 2019 Budget: Veterans Benefits Administration and the Board of 

Veterans’ Appeals.’’ March 15, 2018, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittees on 

Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, Economic Opportunity, http://docs.house.gov/meetings/VR/VR09/20180315/106968/HHRG–115–VR09–Wstate-AugustineL–20180315.pdf. 23Department of Veterans Affairs, ‘‘Understanding Economic Competitiveness in Relation to 

Their Non-Veteran Counterparts.’’ Accessed March 16, 2018. https://www.data.va.gov/story/economic-opportunities-veterans. 24Shane, Leo. Military Times. VA benefits chief Allison Hickey resigns. October 16, 2015. 

https://www.militarytimes.com/veterans/2015/10/16/va-benefits-chief-allison-hickey-resigns/ 25Student Veterans of America acknowledges there is a current Under Secretary of Benefits 

candidate pending congressional approval, and several acting personnel temporarily filling these 

roles, though we find temporary personnel insufficient due to the institutional hesitance to make 

structural decisions. 

of the payments is under no control of the student. In the case of Post-9/11 GI Bill, 

for example, the VA requires the SCO to certify the student enrollment before VA 

authorizes payment for each of those students. This requirement prevents overpayments and otherwise potentially harmful ‘‘clawbacks’’ from students. Understanding 

that timely payments to schools is important, schools must recognize that penalizing 

students for using their earned GI Bill benefits due to the perceived delays of administrative burden is wholly inappropriate. 

In some cases, families of the fallen have been unfairly targeted with late fees 

due to the VA’s delayed or late payments at no fault of the student. 21 While some 

schools have received billions of dollars of Post-9/11 GI Bill dollars, we call on higher education as an industry to be flexible with service-affiliated students using VA 

education benefits, as it is greatly in their interest to find ways to support this important population of non-traditional students. Schools that already provide this 

level of flexibility to these students should have no additional burden in compliance 

with these rules, and Student Veterans of America supports the passage of this bill. 

SVA PROPOSAL, Under Secretary of Economic Opportunity 

In a recent House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs and Economic Opportunity Subcommittees hearing on the topic of 

‘‘Department of Veterans Affairs Fiscal Year 2019 Budget: Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals,’’ Student Veterans of America’s Director of Policy, Lauren Augustine, testified on the lack of resource-focus on 

economic opportunity programs at VA. 22 VA has previously expressed publicly that, 

‘‘Economic competitiveness isn’t just about employment; it encompasses overall employment, wealth, independent living, housing, career mobility and educational attainment. VA is proud to work alongside employment experts at the Department of 

Labor and policy leaders in DoD to ensure we are in alignment with relevant trends 

and services they offer to transitioning service members and veterans.’’ 23

With economic opportunity as a stated priority of VA, we propose the establishment of a Veterans Economic Opportunity Administration at VA, including the creation of a new political appointment for an Under Secretary for Veterans Economic 

Opportunity who would report directly to the Secretary (see Appendix A). Responsibilities of this new division at VA would include the administration of housing 

loan guaranty and related programs, vocational rehabilitation and employment 

(VR&E), education assistance programs, and transition programs (see Appendix B 

for detailed division of applicable programs). 

Our proposal limits the number of additional full-time employees to the current 

footprint of these programs, thereby limits any expansion of government and bureaucracy; on the contrary, the proposal flattens government, and increases the efficiency of an otherwise historically neglected set of veteran-empowering programs. 

Functionally, we propose converting the currently vacant role of the Deputy Under 

Secretary of Economic Opportunity into a political appointment as an Under Secretary. This has a laundry list of much-needed outcomes: 

• Increases Accountability. As of this hearing, it has been 886 days since VA 

last had a permeant Under Secretary of Benefits. 24 As noted, there is currently 

no Deputy Under Secretary of Economic Opportunity. When congress, other federal agencies, and other external partners seek accountability, there is effectively nobody to ‘‘answer the mail.’’ 25 This proposal would provide for greater 

accountability and access to issues that empower veterans. It further prevents 

these issues from being reduced in priority; at present, VA has given no indicaleonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

38 

26 Executive Order 13822. Supporting Our Veterans During Their Transition From Uniformed 

Service to Civilian Life. January 9, 2018. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/01/12/ 

2018–00630/supporting-our-veterans-during-their-transition-from-uniformed-service-to-civilianlife 27 In a House Veterans Affairs Committee budget hearing on March 15, 2018, when asked to 

provide an approximation of how much time is spent focusing on each division of the Veterans 

Benefits Administration, senior VA leadership shared, ‘‘I don’t know if I could answer that correctly’’; panel members representing VA were unable to provide a clear response as to the purpose of the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment program; several additional responses to 

Member questions failed to provide informative replies. 28 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Budget. FY 2019 Budget Submission. https:// 

www.va.gov/budget/products.asp 29Senate Hearing 112–19, Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Veterans Employment: Improving the Transition from the Battlefield to the Workplace. April 13, 2011, http:// 

www.gpo.gov?fdays?browse?committee.action?chamber=senate&committee=va 30 Clark, James. For Most Vets, PTSD Isn’t the Problem, ‘Transition Stress’ Is. Here’s What 

It Means, January 25, 2018, http://taskandpurpose.com/what-is-transition-stress/ 

tion that there is any intention of filling the Deputy Under Secretary of Economic Opportunity role, effectively going the opposite direction of this proposal. • Elevates Economic Opportunity Issues. Directly relevant to President 

Trump’s Executive Order 13822, ‘‘Supporting Our Veterans during Their Transition from Uniformed Services to Civilian Life.’’ 26 This proposal supports the 

importance of transition, education, employment, and well-being. Further, sends 

a strong signal that economic opportunity issues truly matter, and are important enough to have the leadership of an Under Secretary. Giving a national 

voice to issues like home ownership, education, training, and employment is a 

critically important measure. • Reduces Bureaucracy. Bureaucracy at VA has historically led to serious national challenges, and keeping economic opportunity issues buried at the bottom 

of the VBA is not the answer. The lack of a clear response on several basic 

questions regarding several economic opportunity programs at VA underscored 

the importance of leadership in this area, and was a direct result of a structure 

not functioning to benefit the end user. 27 This proposal flattens the bureaucracy of VA in favor of the veteran, versus creating additional layers in the current ‘‘chain of command.’’ One need only to review the recent budget submission 

to see that the bureaucracy of VA is not resulting in resources being devoted 

to these issues consistent with the needs of veterans. 28

• Establishes Direct Counterpart. DoL and the Department of Defense (DoD) 

presently lack a direct counterpart within VA, and any significant initiative 

must achieve multiple layers of approval before moving ahead. This proposal 

provides DoD and DoL with a political appointee who can move important programs into the modern age, while supporting their missions more broadly for 

better whole-of-government outcomes. Issues such as transition and employment presently suffer from a lack of long-term attention, leading to 

unimpressive outcomes. Testifying on transition and employment issues in a 

Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing, John Campbell, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Transition Policy stated that, ‘‘A key component 

[of transition] is introducing information to servicemembers early in their careers, not just at the time of separation.’’ Campbell specifically noted that, 

‘‘waiting until the end of military service to educate the war fighter.is too late.’’ 

This testimony was delivered to the Committee seven years ago, yet transition 

challenges continue to plague this important population of Americans. 29

• Supports ‘‘Whole Health.’’ A tragically elastic narrative exists around veterans as either ‘‘broken or damaged.’’ In reality, the vast majority of veterans 

are like many other Americans-hard-working, community-oriented neighbors 

who want what’s best for their children. Creation of an Under Secretary of Economic Opportunity will empower veterans to be successful as they transition, 

through improved education programs, better employment opportunities. One of 

the major challenges facing veterans today is ‘‘transition stress’’, an issue that 

an Under Secretary of Economic Opportunity would be keen to address. 30 With 

better service and stronger outcomes, more veterans will be apt to ‘‘Choose VA.’’ 

Disappointingly, some within the VA structure that have voiced opposition to the 

importance of elevating these issues with the creation of Under Secretary of Economic Opportunity. Their concerns have been over ‘‘increased resource costs and creation of redundant roles.’’ Interestingly, the proposal would achieve the exact opposite effect. With a capped footprint, no significant increase in costs should occur as 

our proposal intends, unless the implementation at VA diverges from the purpose 

behind the concept. Furthermore, we anticipate long-term costs actually decreasing 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

39 

31 United States. Cong. House. Committee on Veterans Affairs. Legislative Hearing on H.R. 

356; H.R. 832; H.R. 1994; H.R. 2133; H.R. 2275; H.R. 2344; H.R. 2360; H.R. 2361; and a draft 

bill. Hearings, June 2, 2007. 114th Cong. 1st sess. 32Department of Veterans Affairs, Understanding Economic Competitiveness in Relation to 

Their Non-Veteran Counterparts. Accessed March 16, 2018. https://www.data.va.gov/story/economic-opportunities-veterans. 33https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/PB2006113212.xhtml 34 Cate, C.A., Lyon, J.S., Schmeling, J., & Bogue, B.Y. (2017). National Veteran Education 

Success Tracker: A Report on the Academic Success of Student Veterans Using the Post-9/11 

GI Bill. Student Veterans of America, Washington, D.C., http://nvest.studentveterans.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/03/NVEST–Report—FINAL.pdf. 35 Jared Lyon, Defining Our Future: Today’s Scholars, Tomorrow’s Leaders, Jan. 5, 2018, 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/defining-our-future-todays-scholars-tomorrows-leaders-jared-lyon 

due to additional program scrutiny resulting in more cost-effective program management. 

Citing consolidation being a driving factor in increased communication-communication which should occur regardless-is a poor justification for preventing this 

greatly needed proposal. While current acting leadership may be exceptional at their 

ability to implement these programs, program implementation has been historically 

inconsistent, and may wane in the future to the detriment of veterans. It appears 

maintenance of bureaucracy is the chief concern for those opposing this proposal, 

placing an emphasis on preserving ‘‘the way things are’’ for the sake of doing so, 

versus the prioritization of the customer: veterans. We believe this to be a shortsighted view, and favor looking towards the future instead. 

When previously introduced in the 114th Congress, veterans organizations came 

out in force to support the concept including The Disabled American Veterans 

(DAV), The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), The American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA), and Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA). 31

Today, our proposal further simplifies the concept and suggest no intention of impacting the DoL VETS program; additional veterans organizations have stepped up 

to share their support for the current concept including: The Travis Manion Foundation, The Mission Continues, The Retired Enlisted Association, High Ground Veterans Advocacy, and others. While some prefer the status quo, we recognize that 

bold initiatives are required to ensure our country delivers the best outcomes possible for veterans. 

VA proudly cites that the Department, ‘‘has a mission to help veterans maximize 

their economic competitiveness and thus, increase the number of economic opportunities for Veterans and their families.’’ 32 This proposal will maximize the notion 

that the Department publicly espouses in empowering veterans for successful lives. 

The 1996 Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition 

Assistance once stated, ‘‘If employment is the door to a successful transition to civilian life, education will be the key to employment in the information age.’’ 33 Future 

generations of veterans are counting on the success of this proposal, and we’re eager 

to work with this Congress and President Trump in making it a reality. Student 

Veterans of America is eager to work with this. 

In addition to the testimony on the previously mentioned legislation, we generally 

support the following bills, though we have no formal position on these proposals 

at this time: H.R. 4835, the Job Training through Off-Base Opportunities and Local 

Support for Veterans Act; H.R. 5044, the Service-Disabled Veterans Small Business 

Continuation Act; DRAFT, the VA Home Loan Improvement Act of 2018. 

The success of veterans in higher education is no mistake or coincidence. Research 

consistently demonstrates that this unique population of non-traditional students is 

far outpacing their peers in many measures of academic performance. 34 At our 10th 

annual national conference, the President and CEO of SVA, Jared Lyon, shared the 

story of the quote on our anniversary challenge coin noting, ‘‘Some attribute the following text to Thucydides and others note that it’s a paraphrase of a book written 

by Sir William Francis Butler from the late 1800’s. The reality, either way, rings 

as true today as it ever has, and the phrase goes like this, ‘The nation that makes 

a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done 

by cowards and its fighting done by fools.’′′ 35

We thank the Chairman, Ranking Member, and the Committee members for your 

time, attention, and devotion to the cause of veterans in higher education. As always, we welcome your feedback and questions, and we look forward to continuing 

to work with this Committee, the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, and the entire 

congress to ensure the success of all generations of veterans through education. 

f 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

40 

Prepared Statement of Bonnie Carroll 

March 19, 2018 

The Honorable Gus Bilirakis 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Representative Bilirakis: 

As the national organization that has provided comfort and care to the families 

of America’s fallen military heroes since 1994, the Tragedy Assistance Program for 

Survivors (TAPS) would like to thank you for sponsoring H.R. 4830, the 

‘‘Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act 

(SITREP).’’ 

H.R. 4830 would give the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (VA) the ability to disapprove any course of education unless the educational institutions providing the 

course permit individuals to attend or participate in courses pending payment by 

the VA and accept a Certificate of Eligibility (COE) as a promise of payment. 

For a variety of reasons, VA payments are sometimes delayed. But as a result, 

many institutions of higher learning sometimes demand payment from the student 

because of the delayed VA payments. Students receiving these payments are not allowed to attend classes, register for next semester classes or use campus facilities 

(library, health center) because of payment delay. In some cases, students are put 

on payment plans they cannot afford or are forced to take out student loans with 

egregious origination fees in order to continue their education program. 

H.R. 4830 would correct this unfair policy, allowing students receiving VA payments to have the same protections as those who receive Title IV funding such as 

Pell Grants and Federal student loans. Student survivors and veterans should not 

be financially handicapped because of VA and higher education bureaucracy. 

We are most grateful for this important legislation and encourage your colleagues 

in the House to sign on to cosponsor this bill. 

Respectfully, 

Bonnie Carroll 

Founder and President 

f 

Statements For The Record 

MATT MILLER 

Introduction 

Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke, and distinguished members of 

the Subcommittee, it is an honor for me to have a second opportunity to testify before you on matters of great importance to the veterans we serve. Thank you for 

the opportunity to provide a statement for today’s hearing on legislation that you 

are considering. I thank you all for your tireless efforts to ensure that America fulfills its obligations to our service members, veterans, and their families. I am the 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy at the Department of Labor’s (DOL or Department) Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS). Our mission is to work 

with various stakeholders in a manner that allows veterans, reservists, and guardsmen to obtain and maintain meaningful careers. 

The Department is the Federal government’s focal point for training, employment 

services, and information related to the economic health of all workers. It has the 

expertise and a nationwide network to provide skills training and employment opportunities for anyone who needs them, and veterans receive priority of service. This 

integrated network and DOL programs are best suited to continue generating positive employment outcomes for the men and women who have served our country. 

I’m pleased to report the employment situation for veterans continues to improve. 

The unemployment rate for veterans was down to 3.5 percent for the month of February, and I continue to hear from employers who are hiring veterans because they 

provide the technical and leadership skills their businesses need. 

Last year, the Department’s programs provided services to over 662,000 veterans, 

transitioning service members, and members of our National Guard and Reserves. 

Approximately 400,000 veterans received services through the American Job Center 

(AJC) network; 16,096 homeless veterans were served through the Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program (HVRP); 172,847 transitioning service members and 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

41 

1 38 U.S.C. §§ 2021(e)(1)(F) and 2021A(f)(1) were extended through FY 2018 by the Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2017, Public Law 115–62. 2Department of Labor. (2017, December 21) VETS 2016 Annual Report to Congress. Retrieved 

from https://www.dol.gov/vets/media/VETS—FY16—Annual—Report—to—Congress.pdf. 

military spouses were served through the Transition Assistance Program’s (TAP) 

employment-related services; 34,981 veterans were served through compliance based 

efforts; and, 38,262 veterans received services through active apprenticeships. We 

continue to work to strengthen our coordination and collaboration with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Department of Defense, (DoD), and other federal 

agencies to ensure smooth transitions to civilian employment for those serving in 

our military, and continuing employment assistance for veterans, military spouses, 

and caregivers. 

While this hearing is focused on several bills under consideration by the Subcommittee, I will focus my remarks to the two pieces of proposed legislation that 

have a direct impact on the programs administered by DOL, specifically on H.R. 

4451, the ‘‘Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Programs Reauthorization Act of 2017’’ 

and H.R. 4835, the ‘‘Job Training through Off-Base Opportunities and Local Support 

for Veterans Act,’’ or the ‘‘Job TOOLS for Veterans Act.’’ While we do not take a 

formal position on the draft bill which would establish the Veterans Economic Opportunity and Transition Administration within VA, I will speak to DOL’s work in 

the areas of economic opportunity and transition. 

H.R. 4451-‘‘Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Programs Reauthorization 

Act of 2017′′ 

H.R. 4451, the ‘‘Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program Reauthorization Act 

of 2017,’’ provides a four-year extension of the authorization of appropriations for 

the VETS’ Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program and Homeless Female Veterans and Veterans with Families grants. Additionally, the bill would expand the 

population eligible for program services to include veterans participating in the 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-VA Supportive Housing (HUD–VASH) program for which rental assistance is provided; Native American Veterans who receive 

assistance under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self Determination 

Act of 1996; veterans who are transitioning from being incarcerated; and, veterans 

participating in the VA rapid rehousing and prevention program. 

The Department strongly supports the intent of H.R. 4451, and we believe enactment of the bill would enable DOL to provide more comprehensive workforce reintegration services to veterans who experience homelessness. HVRP is the only federal program focusing exclusively on helping homeless veterans to reintegrate into 

the workforce. The Department continues to support the funding of these employment services for veterans experiencing homelessness, as well as those at-risk of 

homelessness. 

H.R. 4451 would extend HVRP’s authorization to 2022; the current authorization 

is set to expire at the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2018. 1 Grantees under this program 

are competitively selected through a rigorous application process and are measured 

based on their effectiveness in placing these veterans in employment. In Program 

Year 2016, the HVRP served over 16,000 veterans experiencing homelessness, and 

67 percent of these individuals were placed in jobs. 

In our appearance at the Subcommittee’s recent hearing on homeless veterans, 

DOL asked the Subcommittee to consider revising the definition of homelessness to 

include expanding the eligible populations to include homeless veterans who have 

been recently housed through rapid rehousing and prevention programs, which, in 

our view, will greatly improve homeless veterans’ chances of success. We appreciate 

the Subcommittee’s response to our request. Studies have shown that barriers to 

employment still exist after immediate housing needs are met, and individuals still 

run a risk of becoming homeless again. 2 This eligibility expansion is especially critical now; as communities have become more successful at helping veterans to exit 

homelessness more quickly, the current statutory definition of ‘‘homeless veteran’’ 

creates an unintended barrier for those veterans to be able to access the employment services and opportunities that will help ensure that they never experience 

homelessness again. 

However, in addition to VA programs, there are many local programs that also 

provide housing services to the homeless veteran population, including many programs funded through HUD’s Continuum of Care Program and Emergency Solutions Grant Program and other federal funding sources. The proposed legislative 

change would not allow veterans participating in these faith- or community-based 

housing programs to be eligible for HVRP services. Accordingly, DOL recommends 

that section 2(c) of the bill be revised to further amend 38 U.S.C.§2021(a) to also 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

42 

include persons who are considered ‘‘recently housed,’’ defined as an individual who 

now has stable living conditions, but was considered to meet the definition of ‘‘homeless veteran’’ within the 60 days prior to requesting services. This would allow the 

greatest number of recently housed veterans to benefit from HVRP services. 

The Department supports the intent of H.R. 4451 recognizing that it will mean 

a substantial increase in the population eligible to receive HVRP services. To accommodate these changes with existing funding, VETS might need to establish service 

priorities, in order to reach those with the greatest needs and to avoid duplication 

of services. The Department would welcome the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee to discuss further amendments to H.R. 4451 that would help to ensure 

the goals of the bill are met. 

H.R. 4835-‘‘Job TOOLS for Veterans Act’’ 

H.R. 4835, the ‘‘Job TOOLS for Veterans Act,’’ tasks the Secretary of Labor to conduct off-base transition training (OBTT) for veterans and their spouses in no less 

than 50 locations in States, with at least 20 States being areas with high unemployment among veterans, for a five-year period. At these locations, the Secretary is to 

provide training that generally follows the content of the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), under section 1144 of title 10 of the U.S. Code. 

The Department supports the concept of providing flexible service delivery but 

disagrees with this approach to serving veterans in communities. The TAP model 

is designed for transitioning active service members and spouses who often do not 

have access to community resources. Veterans and their spouses in communities are 

better served through the vast array of services available through the DOL funded 

workforce system. 

The Department attempted such a pilot a few years ago with mixed results. The 

Dignified Burial and Other Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2012 (P.L. 112– 

260), included a similar provision directing the Secretary of Labor to conduct a twoyear pilot program to provide the TAP Employment Workshop to veterans and their 

spouses at locations other than military installations. In January 2015, VETS completed the pilot program. In total, VETS conducted 21 pilot workshops in three 

States: Georgia, Washington, and West Virginia. 

Out of 250 total participants, 63 percent were within the 25–44 age group. The 

average attendance was 12 participants per workshop (ranging from 2 to 37 participants per workshop) and one workshop had to be cancelled due to a lack of participation. While participants in the pilot program found it helpful, the components of 

the program that were rated most beneficial are the same components found in the 

workforce system. Fifty-six percent of respondents indicated the resume writing instruction was the most beneficial, while 32 percent indicated interview skills as the 

most helpful. In VETS’ recent report to the Subcommittee on TAP, VETS concluded, 

‘‘the employment needs of veterans and spouses are best met through the services 

offered by their local AJC. These services may be supplemented where appropriate 

through reference to the online DOL Employment Workshop curriculum. DOL updates this curriculum on an ongoing basis. We believe that the programs currently 

in place are sufficient to meet the employment needs of veterans and spouses and 

see no need to provide a DOL Employment Workshop to veterans and spouses beyond what is already available online.’’ 

From this pilot, VETS gained a better understanding of the broad spectrum of individual employment needs among the veteran population, and indicated limitations 

of a single program of instruction. Additionally, it was a challenge for many of the 

participants to remain in the workshop for the entire three days due to personal 

and professional commitments. DOL believes this was a contributing factor to the 

low participation rates. 

Veterans and their spouses may not require the full spectrum of skills covered in 

the Department’s Employment Workshop. Depending on when the veteran left the 

military, their work and life experiences could be much broader than that of 

transitioning service members entering the civilian workforce for the first time. Veterans may only need assistance with resume writing, military skills translation, 

interviewing techniques, or the federal hiring process; or, they may require assistance for local or personal issues not covered in the Employment Workshop. 

DOL maintains that employment assistance for veterans in communities is most 

effective when provided as part of a comprehensive delivery model focused through 

the State Workforce system, where veterans get priority of service and are often eligible for individualized career services. The Department believes it would be more 

effective for veterans and their spouses to leverage the existing employment resources from our AJCs and implement a one-day model to best meet the individual 

employment needs of veterans and their spouses. If the idea of specific veteran 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

43 

workshops is of continuing interest to the Subcommittee, we would be pleased to 

work with you to consider mechanisms to make these available. 

For example, with lessons learned from the previous pilot project, VETS and the 

Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) partnered with the Johnson County AJC in Overland Park, Kansas, to pilot a different model to provide personalized employment 

resources to veterans and their spouses by leveraging existing local Workforce System resources. The intention of this model was to educate the participants on the 

vast array of services and have them register for follow-on services that best meet 

their personal needs. The feedback provided by VETS, VFW, and the local AJC was 

very positive. The Department was able to implement this model under current authority at no additional cost. DOL sees value in considering alternatives to hold 

events like these on the weekend in order to attract participants including guardsmen and reservists who may not be available on weekdays. 

Finally, we note that H.R. 4835 provides no additional funding for this pilot. 

DOL’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 request for TAP could not support the regular program 

and a pilot of this magnitude. 

Conclusion 

We at the Department are committed to working with our federal, state, and local 

partners to help our veterans to obtain and maintain suitable employment, and we 

look forward to working with the Subcommittee to ensure the continued success of 

our efforts. Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke, and distinguished 

Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my statement. Thank you again for 

the opportunity to testify today. I am happy to answer any questions that you may 

have at this time. 

f 

JARED LYON 

March 20, 2018 

Chairman Jodey Arrington 

Ranking Member Beto O’Rourke 

Members of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity 

House Committee on Veterans Affairs 

335 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O’Rourke, and Members of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee: 

On behalf of Student Veterans of America (SVA), a coalition of student veteran 

organizations on more than 1,500 college and university campuses across the country and representing more than 700,000 student veterans in higher education, I am 

writing to express our support of HR 4830, the ‘‘Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act’’ or the ‘‘SIT–REP Act.’’ 

This legislation is important for student veterans. This bill proposes requiring 

schools that accept VA education dollars to adopt veteran-friendly policies that prevent discriminating student veterans and their families due to payment issues from 

VA. The bill would disapprove any school that fails to adopt policies that (1) permit 

covered individuals to attend institution after providing a certificate of eligibility for 

entitlement to education benefits under Chapters 30, 31, 33, or 35 until institution 

receives payment for course or 90 days after certificate of eligibility provided; and 

(2) prohibit institutions from imposing any penalty, including late fees, denial of access to classes, facilities, etc., or requirement that the individual borrow additional 

funds due to delayed benefit disbursement. 

Schools may view payments from GI Bill students as delayed, and thereby require 

students to take out unnecessary loans or assess unfair late fees, while the timing 

of the payments is under no control of the student. In the case of Post-9/11 GI Bill, 

for example, the VA requires the SCO to certify the student enrollment before VA 

authorizes payment for each of those students. This requirement prevents overpayments and otherwise potentially harmful ‘‘clawbacks’’ from students. Understanding 

that timely payments to schools is important, schools must recognize that penalizing 

students for using their earned GI Bill benefits due to the perceived delays of administrative burden is wholly inappropriate. 

In some cases, families of the fallen have been unfairly targeted with late fees 

due to the VA’s delayed or late payments at no fault of the student.21 While some 

schools have received billions of dollars of Post-9/11 GI Bill dollars, we call on higher education as an industry to be flexible with service-affiliated students using VA 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

44 

education benefits, as it is greatly in their interest to find ways to support this important population of nontraditional students. Schools that already provide this 

level of flexibility to these students should have no additional burden in compliance 

with these rules, and Student Veterans of America supports the passage of this bill. 

Please contact me at jared.lyon@studentveterans.org or 202–223–4710 with any 

questions about this issue, or the great work of our student veterans across the 

country. 

Sincerely, 

Jared Lyon 

f 

DR. JOSEPH WESCOTT 

CHAIRMAN ARRINGTON, RANKING MEMBER O’ROURKE, and Members of 

the Committee, the National Association of State Approving Agencies (NASAA) is 

pleased to provide its views on certain education benefits legislation under consideration by the Committee today, March 20, 2018. 

NASAA does not receive any grants or contracts directly from the federal government, though its member organizations are state agencies operating in whole or in 

part under federal contracts funded by Congress and administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 

On behalf of fifty-one State approving agencies (SAAs), including the territory of 

Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, NASAA thanks the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity for its strong commitment to a better future for all service members, veterans and their families through its continued support of the GI Billr educational program. 

H. R. 1206, a bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to include the cost of 

applying to an institution of higher learning as part of the benefits provided under 

the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program. 

State approving agencies recognize that the costs of higher education continue to 

rise, and those costs include the fee required to apply to an institution of higher 

learning. Certainly, we believe that barriers to veterans’ application and entrance 

into college should be removed or mitigated whenever possible. As such, we agree 

that the cost of application to an institution, capped at $750 so as to protect veterans and taxpayers from providers who might take advantage of this provision, 

should be payable under the GI Bill. 

NASAA supports this bill. 

H. R. 3023, a bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to pay reporting fees to educational institutions. 

State approving agencies take seriously our role as ‘‘the gatekeepers of quality’’ 

and the ‘‘boots on the ground’’ defending the integrity of the GI Bill. We are committed to making sure that only quality programs are approved and we do so by 

carefully evaluating facilities and curriculum while simultaneously applying federal 

and state law and regulation. An additional and equally important role is the continued oversight of these programs after their initial approval. We do so in conjunction with other stakeholders in veteran organizations and higher education, including state licensing agencies, state higher education departments, the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, the Department of Education and national and regional accrediting agencies. 

We also seek to encourage our approved institutions to provide resources and policies, which will help guarantee the success of our veteran students once they enroll 

in a SAA approved program. Congress, in establishing laws and regulations governing the manner and method by which education could be approved for veterans, 

has wisely provided that the States, through their State approving agencies, are 

best situated and staffed to evaluate and oversee educational programming being 

considered for approval and being continued for GI Bill payment. State approving 

agencies and the VA have long recognized the costs affiliated with administering the 

GI Bill at institutions. While institutions, as well as veterans, have benefited from 

increases in the amounts paid, there have also been marked increases in the 

amount of work and difficulty of tasks required of school certifying officials (SCO). 

To illustrate the amount of work involved, the current SCO Handbook, published 

by the VA to provide detailed instructions to school certifying officials, is 138 pages 

in length. This publication is revised as needed, often twice a year and SCOs are 

expected to be proficient in all areas and requirements. It is not inappropriate, given 

the increasing complexity and number of certifications and reports, which VA releonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

45 

quires of schools to administer the GI Bill at their institutions, for the VA to reimburse a small portion of these expenses through reporting fees. Schools receive $16 

for each student certified at their institution and recent legislation (PL 111–3779, 

section 304) mandates that this money be in a separate account and only be used 

for the benefit of student veterans. State approving agencies, as a part of their oversight duties and responsibilities, ensure that these monies are being used appropriately. Reporting fees are often used at schools for the training of SCOs and to 

offset the added administrative cost of certification. Frequently, this money is also 

used to purchase needed equipment for veterans’ resource centers, veteran’s graduation cords, and other resources to recognize and support the success of our veterans 

and their families. 

NASAA opposes this bill. 

H. R. 3940, a bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for housing 

stipends and supply fee payments under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program for individuals affected by extended school closures due to disasters. 

The upheaval to a student veteran and their family during a disaster can be horrendous and life altering. Recent examples of hurricane ravaged regions such as 

Puerto Rico and certain areas of Texas illustrate the need to allow a student veteran 

the opportunity to access a limited amount of educational assistance during such a 

traumatic time. Assistance at such times of transition can be key to the student 

being able to continue their studies or at least be prepared to do so when institutions return to some degree of normalcy. 

NASAA supports this bill. 

H. R. 4830, a bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the disapproval of any course of education for purposes of the educational assistance programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs unless the educational institution providing the course permits individuals to attend or participate in courses pending 

payment by Department, and for other purposes. 

As mentioned earlier, State approving agencies seek to encourage our approved 

institutions to provide resources and policies, which will help guarantee the success 

of our veteran students once they enroll in an SAA approved program. As such, we 

do not consider it inappropriate for Congress to consider establishing, as a part of 

requirements for approval, that educational institutions grant veterans a set period 

of time during which they are protected from being unenrolled or charged additional 

fees or required to take out loans while they are awaiting payment from the VA 

of their benefits. Given the many improvements found in PL 115–48, which the VA 

is required to implement in the coming days, it would be understandable if there 

were further delays in the payment of educational benefits. We do agree that this 

protection need only extend to veteran students, primarily chapter 33, whose tuition 

and fees are paid by the VA directly to the schools. 

Given the fact that many leading institutions of education, particularly accredited 

public institutions of higher learning (IHLs), are already offering this protection to 

student veterans, we do not think it unreasonable to require that all approved educational institutions provide it to the students on their campus as well. In addition, 

though some might argue that in their state this has not been a problem, there are 

states wherein veteran students have faced penalty for late payment of benefits. Regardless, when we are discussing one of our nation’s greatest treasures and trusts, 

the families of the fallen, even one incident is one too many. 

NASAA supports this bill. 

Today, SAAs throughout our nation, composed of approximately 218 professional 

and support personnel, are supervising over 10,000 active facilities with over 

100,000 programs. We pledge to you that we will not fail in our critical mission and 

in our commitment to safeguard the public trust, to protect the GI Bill and to defend the future of those who have so nobly defended us. Mr. Chairman, NASAA 

thanks the Committee for the opportunity to share our concerns and suggestions 

and we commit to working together with you and your staff to enhance the pending 

legislation. 

f 

LARRY MADISON 

February 15, 2018 

The Honorable Gus Bilirakis 

United States House of Representatives 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

46 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Represenatative Bilirakis: 

On behalf of the members of The Retired Enlisted Association, a Congressionallychartered veterans’ service organization and the largest association in the nation exclusively for enlisted personnel and veterans from all branches of the Armed Forces, 

I am writing in support of your legislation, H.R. 4830, the ‘‘Servicemembers Improved Transition through Reforms for Ensuring Progress Act’’ or the ‘‘SIT–REP 

Act.’’ Your legislation would provide for the disapproval of any course of education 

for purposes of the educational assistance programs of the Department of Veterans 

Affairs unless the educational institution providing the course permits individuals 

to attend or participate in courses pending payment by the Department. 

Currently veterans are often penalized in ways that other students who are recipients of a federal educational financial assistance are not if the Department of Veterans Affairs payment is not provided when the institution requires. 

Your legislation will remedy that situation and make sure that veterans are not 

unfairly penalized. Thank you for your leadership on this issue. 

Respectfully, 

Larry Madison 

Legislative Director 

Æ 

leonard.horne on VACREP0180 with DISTILLER