Chairman Michaud and Members of the Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) would like to thank you for the opportunity to present our views concerning pending legislation.  PVA appreciates the effort and cooperation this Subcommittee demonstrates as they address the problems of today’s veterans and the veterans of tomorrow.

H.R. 4062, the “Veterans’ Health and Radiation Safety Act”

PVA supports H.R. 4062, the “Veterans’ Health and Radiation Safety Act,” which would require an annual report on low volume programs at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical facilities and establish a requirement for training of employees and contractors wherever radioactive isotopes are used.

Under the provisions of this legislation, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will be required to ensure training is provided in the proper handling and use of radioactive isotopes in VA facilities.  While PVA does not believe Congress should be in the business of legislating good medical practice, the incidents at VA facilities demonstrate that there sometimes is a need for directed guidance.  Radioactive materials can never be taken for granted and ensuring VA employees, and more specifically their contractors, are required to have adequate and appropriate training is clearly necessary.  PVA also thinks it is wise to have contracting officers review contracts prior to extension or renewal to ensure these requirements are met.  The dangerous nature of radioactive materials makes this critical for both the safety and health of the employees and the veterans they serve. 

H.R. 4465, a bill to properly determine a veteran’s financial status

PVA supports H.R. 4465 to properly account for a veteran’s children when determining financial status.  While this may seem like a minor issue, it can have a tremendous impact on those that this legislation will affect.

In today’s society, more and more extended families are taking responsibility for children.  Grandparents and sometimes great grandparents are taking care of the children of their children.  Invariably these “new” parents are older, often with much lower income, and are gaining custody of these children and providing for a family.

While the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recognizes the financial challenge custody of these children can create when determining financial status, VA does not.  The IRS considers someone a dependent when a person has custody of the child.  Social Security includes grandchildren in its definition of a child, making them eligible for dependent benefits.  But for VA, a dependent is identified as the biological, adopted, or step-child of a veteran only.  If a veteran has sole custody of a child and is enrolled in the VA, PVA believes that the child should be considered when calculating the financial status of the veteran.  While the veteran could go through the burdensome adoption process, this expense will create only greater challenges for the custodial parents and it should not be necessary.  The challenge of a grandparent or great grandparent taking on the care of a child is significantly difficult already and VA should not add to that burden.  Additionally, PVA supports consistency across Federal Agencies when considering similar benefit calculations.

H.R. 4505, a bill to furnish nursing home care to parents of children who died serving in the armed forces 

PVA supports H.R. 4505 to furnish nursing home care to parents of children who died serving in the armed forces.  This legislation corrects an injustice that requires parents to lose all their children before being eligible for State Veterans Home residency.  While this may have made sense in the past when children often remained home with their parents to tend the farm or family business, it does not make sense in today’s mobile economy.

The “Improve VA Outreach Act of 2010”

PVA welcomes legislation to improve outreach to our nation’s veterans.  There are still many veterans who may not realize they are eligible for VA benefits.  This particularly includes women veterans who are traditionally underserved, and those veterans that may erroneously believe that because they did not serve in combat that they are not eligible for VA benefits.  The Secretary should make every effort to reach out to these veterans, especially homeless veterans and those suffering in poverty who may be significantly helped by VA services.  However, this outreach cannot simply be an empty slogan or program that allows VA to proclaim how much they are doing to reach veterans.

PVA is concerned that this legislation may be headed in that direction.  It is unfortunate that Congress must direct VA to “establish and maintain procedures for ensuring the effective coordination of outreach activities of the Department between and among” Federal agencies.  This is a basic task that VA should be doing and should have been doing since its inception, and while PVA welcomes the creation of the Advisory Committee on Outreach, establishing a committee is often a way to demonstrate action when no actual action is taking place.  This committee is meant to advise the Secretary on outreach matters, but this advisory process is already available through meetings the Secretary has with various congressionally chartered Veterans Service Organizations (VSO).  We are not sure that a formal committee will improve this function.

Formalizing this process may provide a stronger voice to the Advisory Committee and its membership.  The requirement that the Advisory Committee conduct “an analysis of the strategic plan” and make recommendations “for improving the plan” is welcome, but if the Secretary chooses to ignore these recommendations, he can.  The Secretary is only required to submit a “summary of all reports and recommendations of the Committee” to Congress and this summary can be slanted in any way the Secretary sees fit.  If Congress truly wishes the Secretary to consider recommendations of the Advisory Committee, this committee should request testimony from the Advisory Committee itself or the members represented on the Committee, at the time of the Secretary’s report.  It can be expected that Congressional Committees may request testimony in the event of significant disagreements with the Secretary, but by compelling testimony in the legislation it sends the message that the Advisory Committee should be heeded and not simply serve as a sounding board or one more empty gesture.

PVA supports all efforts of VA to reach out to its constituents.  With the ever increasing number of veterans from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the increasing age of veterans from previous conflicts, greater needs are being created.  It is the hope of PVA that this outreach program can be an effort that will truly reach those who are in need.  But this will not happen if sufficient resources are not committed to the effort.  Simply establishing an Advisory Committee will not do it and PVA implores the Secretary to do more.

Draft Legislation to “authorize the Secretary to provide hearing aid devices to veterans of World War II”

PVA does not support the legislation to authorize the Secretary to provide hearing aid devices to veterans of World War II as currently written.  PVA believes that if a veteran is enrolled in the VA health system that they should be eligible for a hearing aid.  This would simply be another service provided to enrollees.  However, PVA does not believe that a World War II veteran should be able to bring in a hearing aid prescription from their private doctor and have VA supply the device.  PVA expressed similar objections in the past to non-VA prescriptions being filled by a VA pharmacist.  PVA would support the legislation if it were clarified to clearly state its intent to provide for those who are enrolled in the VA health care system.  In addition, PVA is concerned that the costs associated with this new benefit be supported with newly appropriated funds.  The VA should not be expected to supply this new service with current appropriations which could have detrimental effects on care provided to other veterans.