Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) to testify at this important legislative hearing of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs’ Subcommittee on Health.  DAV is an organization of 1.3 million service-disabled veterans, and devotes its energies to rebuilding the lives of disabled veterans and their families.

You have requested testimony today on three draft bills primarily focused on health care services for veterans under the jurisdiction of the Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  This statement submitted for the record reviews our positions on all of the proposals before you today, and we offer them for your consideration.

Draft bill to expand VA authority to provide consultation, counseling, training and mental health services for family members of veterans receiving nonservice-connected treatment.

As this subcommittee is aware of the importance of families in the recovery of disabled veterans, VA is able to provide limited services to family members, which includes members of the immediate family, the legal guardian of a veteran, or the individual in whose household the veteran certifies an intention to live.  In recent years, VA has included families in mental health evaluations, participation in treatment planning, and collaboration in monitoring treatment outcomes.  Such services are provided to families only when their involvement is included in a treatment plan designed to benefit the veteran.

Section 1782(a) of title 38, United States Code, provides, in general, that the family members of a veteran being treated for a service-connected disability may receive consultation, counseling, training and mental health services in support of the veteran's treatment.  Section 1782(b) pertains to veterans receiving hospital care for a non-service connected disability.  In this instance, VA is authorized to provide those same services to family members if the services were initiated during the veteran's hospitalization and their continuation on an outpatient basis is essential to permit the discharge of the veteran from the hospital.

The draft bill for consideration in today’s hearing would seek to eliminate the aforementioned criteria, and to conform Section 1782 to the provision of services more consistent with medical necessity by expanding VA’s authority to provide mental health services for family members of veterans receiving treatment for nonservice-connected ailments.   While DAV has no adopted resolution from our membership pertaining to this measure, it appears beneficial because some veterans may have a pending claim for service connection of the disability for which he or she is seeking VA care.  Other veterans may not be aware that they may have a meritorious service-connected claim to a disability for which they are receiving nonservice-connected treatment. 

While the measure would provide needed care to disabled veterans, we urge this Subcommittee to ensure additional workload be met with appropriate resources in light of VA testimony that, “funding family readjustment services wholly unrelated to the veteran’s readjustment needs would divert medical care funds needed for veterans’ health care.”  Moreover, such resources should allow VA to be the primary provider of such services and where, on occasion, non-VA providers would be necessary for the provision of care, it is essential that such providers have the proper training and that VA provide the appropriate oversight.

Draft bill to prohibit VA from collecting certain copayments from veterans who are catastrophically disabled.

In conjunction with DAV’s national resolution from our membership calling for legislation to repeal all copayments for military retirees and veterans’ medical services and prescriptions, and as part of The Independent Budget (IB), the DAV fully supports this draft bill, one that meets the IB recommendation that veterans designated by VA as being catastrophically disabled for the purpose of enrollment in health care eligibility category 4 should be exempt from all health care copayments and fees.

The Veterans Nonprofit Research and Education Corporations Enhancement Act of 2008. (Draft bill)

This measure would modernize and enhance oversight and reporting requirements of nonprofit research and education corporations that support VA biomedical research by managing extramural grant funds made available to VA principal investigators.  It would also provide new guidance and policy requirements for the operation of these corporations within the VA research program, and would be responsive to recent recommendations for improved accountability within some of these corporations made by the VA Inspector General. 

The basic statutory authority for these corporations was enacted in 1988, so this bill would be the first significant amendment to that statute.  If enacted, this bill would authorize the corporations to fulfill their full potential in supporting VA biomedical research and education, the results of which would improve treatments and promote higher quality care for veterans, while underwriting VA and Congressional confidence in these corporations’ management of public and private funds.

We note one significant difference between the Subcommittee’s draft bill and its Senate companion bill.  S. 2926 would authorize the VA research and education foundations to reimburse the VA Office of General Counsel for certain specialized legal services rendered to the foundations in connection with establishing and administering research and education agreements entered into by the foundations with other partners in conducting VA research.  This provision is absent from this Subcommittee’s legislation.  We understand that the foundations need these services, and would be required to pay private attorneys for them, and that the Office of General Counsel, in providing these services, has expended considerable resources in aiding these foundations to execute and administer research and education agreements.  We also understand that the foundations are in agreement on such reimbursements.  It would seem equitable that the foundations be authorized to reimburse those costs to the Office of General Counsel, and thus, DAV would have no objection to these Senate provisions being added into this bill.

While DAV has no adopted resolution on this particular legislation, DAV is a strong supporter of a robust VA biomedical research and development program, and we believe enactment of this bill would be in that program’s best interest.  Therefore, DAV would have no objection to enactment of this bill.

Mr. Chairman, again, DAV appreciates the Subcommittee’s interest in these issues, and we appreciate the opportunity to present the DAV’s views, which we hope will be helpful.