⚡NIMITZ NEWS FLASH⚡

Legislative Hearing

House Veterans Affairs Committee

March 18, 2026 (recording here)

HEARING INFORMATION

Witnesses & Written Testimony (linked):

• Mr. Phil Christy: Chief Acquisition Officer, Office of Acquisition, Logistics, and Construction, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

• Ms. Margarita Devlin: Acting Under Secretary for Benefits, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

• Dr. Thomas O'Toole: Acting Assistant Under Secretary for Health for Clinical Services, Veterans Health Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

TOP-LINES TO SHOW YOU ARE IN THE KNOW

1. Members on both sides voiced frustration that the VA still struggles with transparency and responsiveness to Congress, especially when it comes to oversight and answering basic questions.

2. There was broad concern that major VA IT and EHR modernization efforts continue to face delays, cost overruns, and patient safety risks without enough accountability.

3. Lawmakers repeatedly emphasized that mental health (especially PTSD, TBI, and suicide prevention) remains a central challenge, particularly for veterans outside the VA system or involved in the justice system.

4. Several proposals focused on fixing how the VA buys things, with members arguing that outdated contracting processes are wasting money and slowing down care for veterans.

5. There was also a strong push to improve how veterans transition to civilian life, including better job alignment, streamlined programs, and making sure benefits actually lead to long-term economic stability.

PARTY LINE PERSPECTIVES

OPENING STATEMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE

• Chairman Mike Bost underlined the hearing’s focus on Congress’s constitutional responsibility to oversee the VA and ensure it remains accountable to veterans and taxpayers. He explained that reauthorization was a critical tool to evaluate, modernize, and improve VA programs, many of which had not been updated in decades. He said the legislation under consideration aimed to strengthen transparency, accountability, and outcomes for veterans while equipping VA leadership with the tools needed to deliver services effectively.

• Ranking Member Mark Takano stated that the VA had become increasingly opaque and unresponsive to congressional oversight, which he described as unacceptable. He expressed cautious support for reclaiming Congress’s authority but raised concerns about the scope, timeline, and structure of the proposed legislative process. He mentioned that many of the bills were new or substantial rewrites rather than true reauthorizations and argued that more analysis, stakeholder input, and committee work were needed. He also highlighted top priorities, including automatic enrollment in VA health care, continued oversight of the PACT Act, and the need for stronger engagement with veteran service organizations.

STATEMENTS FROM OTHER MEMBERS

• Rep. Tom Barrett shared that his bill aimed to reform VA acquisition and contracting processes, which he argued were currently disjointed and lacked sufficient congressional oversight. He spotlighted ongoing issues with cost overruns, delays, and inefficiencies in major VA technology and medical system contracts. His proposal would establish a centralized Office of Acquisition to improve oversight, accountability, and efficiency. He believed that better procurement practices would both save taxpayer dollars and improve services for veterans.

• Rep. Julia Brownley’s legislation focused on expanding access to comprehensive dental care and reproductive health services for veterans. She argued that most veterans lacked access to dental benefits and that expanding coverage would improve health outcomes while reducing long-term costs. She also spoke on the need to address inequities in reproductive health care for women veterans, including access to abortion services when medically necessary. She framed both proposals as essential to ensuring equitable, comprehensive care for all veterans.

• Rep. Herb Conaway explained that his bill aimed to address gaps in care for incarcerated veterans, particularly those with mental health conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI). He explained that the legislation would establish a pilot program to provide VA-led mental health care through telehealth or mobile units within correctional facilities. He underscored that the bill would prioritize vulnerable veterans and eliminate co-pays while restoring benefits upon release. Rep. Conaway argued that improving access to care during incarceration would reduce recidivism and support successful reintegration.

• Rep. Kelly Morrison spoke about her bill, which sought to improve VA responses to military sexual trauma (MST) and acute sexual assault. She illustrated the prevalence and long-term impacts of such trauma on both women and men veterans. She explained that the legislation would strengthen clinical protocols, ensure access to trained providers and necessary resources, and improve referrals and follow-up care. She advocated for the bill to ensure that veterans received timely, appropriate, and trauma-informed care.

• Rep. Morgan McGarvey stated that his bill aimed to reduce the backlog of appeals at the Board of Veterans’ Appeals by improving attorney retention. He explained that the proposal would allow high-performing attorneys to be promoted to higher pay grades, helping the VA compete with other agencies. He argued that losing experienced attorneys slowed decisions and harmed veterans waiting for benefits. He claimed that the change was targeted, low-cost, and would lead to faster, higher-quality decisions.

• Rep. Jack Bergman’s bill focused on modernizing VA procurement and contracting practices to improve accountability and transparency. He discussed the legislation’s stricter oversight on large contracts, standardized procurement processes, and aligned practices with other federal agencies. He said the bill would ensure better stewardship of taxpayer dollars while safeguarding critical services for veterans. Rep. Bergman underlined that these reforms were necessary given the increased complexity and scale of VA operations.

• Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick advocated for her bill aimed at improving the quality of care provided to veterans by community providers. She emphasized that many providers lacked training in military culture and veteran-specific health issues, contributing to poor outcomes, including higher suicide risk. The legislation would require targeted training, improve accountability, and track compliance among providers. She argued that better-informed providers would lead to improved care and potentially save lives.

• Rep. Tim Kennedy shared that his bill sought to protect and restore the VA workforce following recent layoffs and hiring freezes. He asserted that workforce reductions had negatively impacted care delivery and disproportionately affected veteran employees. He explained that the legislation would reinstate terminated workers, prevent future staffing cuts, and safeguard VA funding. He maintained that a strong workforce was essential to delivering quality care to veterans.

• Rep. Juan Ciscomani’s legislation aimed to improve how the VA supports veterans transitioning to civilian life. He shared that current programs were fragmented across multiple offices, making them difficult to navigate. He proposed consolidating these programs into a unified structure to improve coordination and access. Rep. Ciscomani argued that this reform would enhance outcomes for veterans and strengthen accountability within the VA.

• Rep. Delia Ramirez discussed her bill, which aimed to protect student veterans from predatory institutions that exploit GI Bill benefits. She said the legislation would restore benefits to veterans who were defrauded, allowing them to continue their education. She underscored that no veteran should lose educational opportunities due to fraud, arguing that the bill would provide fairness and accountability while safeguarding veterans’ earned benefits.

• Rep. Maxine Dexter stated that her bill sought to address veteran homelessness by expanding eligibility for VA homelessness assistance programs. She explained that current definitions created barriers that prevented some veterans, including those with certain discharge statuses, from accessing services. She proposed aligning eligibility across programs to ensure consistent access to housing and support services. Rep. Dexter claimed that the bill would remove unnecessary barriers and help more veterans secure stable housing.

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS

• Mr. Phil Christy testified that the VA supported congressional oversight but voiced concern that broad reauthorization efforts could disrupt VA services and benefits. He suggested that oversight goals could also be achieved through alternative methods such as briefings, information requests, and budget justifications. He noted that the VA supported some proposals, recommended further coordination on others, and remained committed to working with Congress to improve services for veterans.

• Chairman Bost asked how establishing a dedicated VA leasing fund would improve long-term infrastructure planning and accountability. Mr. Christy responded that the fund would streamline coordination by reducing reliance on the GSA process and providing independent authority and dedicated funding. He believed that this would increase flexibility, speed up project delivery, improve risk-sharing decisions between leasing and construction, and strengthen congressional oversight through a single funding stream. He also claimed that the proposal would shorten timelines and enable faster delivery of facilities for veterans.

• The Chairman then questioned whether the VA should seek explicit statutory authority from Congress rather than relying on existing guidance to regulate claims assistance services. Ms. Margarita Devlin answered that she did not have a specific opinion to provide on that recommendation at the time. She added that VA appreciated continued engagement with Congress on such issues.

• Chairman Bost asked whether a centralized research data system would improve oversight of VA research projects and outcomes. Dr. Thomas O'Toole responded that while the VA had a strong research enterprise, there was clear room for improvement in transparency and coordination. He stated that enhancements could include better data management, sharing, and review processes beyond just creating a registry. He expressed interest in working with the Committee to refine and improve the proposal.

• The Chairman inquired whether the VA currently had the ability to independently evaluate the cost and performance risks of major acquisition programs. Mr. Christy said that current processes were fragmented and largely ad hoc rather than centrally managed. He claimed that the ARCA proposal would improve this by creating a more structured, enterprise-wide evaluation approach. He agreed that additional statutory structure would provide value for both VA and congressional oversight.

• Ranking Member Takano questioned whether registration and enrollment in VA health care were the same and whether registration alone allowed access to care. Dr. O'Toole confirmed that they were separate processes and that registration alone did not grant access to care. He acknowledged that automatic enrollment would reduce administrative burdens but noted concerns related to implementation, including impacts on ACA tax credits and priority group classifications.

• The Ranking Member asked how statutory limits on the number of VISNs and staffing levels would affect the VA’s ability to adapt to changing needs. Dr. O'Toole replied that the VA preferred flexibility in determining VISN structure based on regional demand and operational needs. He said that rigid statutory limits could constrain the VA’s ability to respond effectively to evolving conditions. He ultimately agreed that flexibility was preferable to fixed requirements.

• Rep. Bergman inquired whether the VA supported codifying regular submission windows and a continuous product adoption cycle for prosthetics and medical implants. Mr. Christy answered that conceptually, the VA supported the idea of accelerating access to improved technologies for veterans. However, he claimed that implementation would require additional resources and careful consideration of contracting constraints.

• Rep. Bergman also asked whether the VA would support consolidating duplicative purchase order processes for surgical items into a more efficient system. Mr. Christy stated that the VA agreed with the goal of simplifying and speeding up payments and reducing duplication. He mentioned that some financial and procedural rules would need to be addressed, but supported improving efficiency in principle.

• Rep. Conaway asked what mental health services the VA provides to justice-involved veterans and whether those services extend to incarcerated veterans. Dr. O'Toole responded that, by law, medical care for incarcerated individuals is the responsibility of correctional systems, not the VA. He explained that VA supports veterans through diversion programs and reentry coordination but does not provide care during incarceration. He raised concerns that the proposed bill could fragment care if not properly integrated, but agreed to work with Congress to refine the approach.

• Rep. Keith Self questioned whether the VA conducted periodic reviews of its advisory committees and whether it had recommended terminating any. Ms. Devlin responded that the VA reviewed committee work and provided feedback, but noted that structural changes required congressional action through the budget process. She was unable to provide details on past termination recommendations and agreed to follow up for the record. Ms. Devlin also raised concerns about the bill’s breadth, including unclear definitions, potential loss of specialized expertise, and possible overlap in committee transitions.

• Rep. Morrison asked about the VA’s current policies for responding to veterans seeking care after sexual assault and when those protocols were last updated. Dr. O'Toole stated he did not have those details available and would provide them for the record. He indicated that the VA was still reviewing the legislation and would offer a formal response later.

• Rep. Morrison inquired about the VA’s ongoing review of its accreditation system, which included issues related to unaccredited claims consultants. Ms. Devlin answered that the review was comprehensive and covered all aspects of accreditation, but was not focused on that issue alone. She mentioned that the VA was working with external partners and would provide more information after completing the review. She underlined that the goal was to improve processes and ensure timely, effective service for veterans.

• Rep. Morrison then turned to how the VA research reform proposal might conflict with existing authorities and operations. Dr. O'Toole responded that the VA supported the bill’s intent but had concerns about potential overlap with existing federal research requirements and regulations. He spoke on the importance of avoiding duplication or confusion with current frameworks. He expressed willingness to work with Congress to improve transparency without creating operational barriers.

• Rep. Ciscomani asked about the operational and acquisition impacts of consolidating transition and economic opportunity programs. Mr. Christy stated that, from an acquisition standpoint, a more centralized structure could be managed effectively under an enterprise approach. Ms. Devlin cautioned that restructuring could disrupt existing integrated systems, require additional leadership layers, and risk creating inefficiencies for veterans. She claimed that current systems were designed to streamline services and that changes must avoid harming access or coordination.

• Rep. Ciscomani also questioned how the VA supported long-term economic success for veterans. Ms. Devlin replied that the VA worked with other agencies to align training and education benefits with high-demand occupations. She explained that the VA aimed to provide veterans with information on labor market needs, geographic considerations, and career pathways. She said this approach helped veterans achieve sustainable employment outcomes.

• Rep. McGarvey asked whether VA data on attorney attrition included probationary employees and requested updated staffing levels at the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. Ms. Devlin did not have that information, but she shared the VA’s goal of delivering timely decisions for veterans and was open to further discussion.

• Rep. McGarvey questioned the VA’s concerns about creating higher-level attorney positions, arguing that retention challenges persisted and affected veterans’ access to timely decisions. Ms. Devlin reiterated that the VA was focused on improving outcomes, but did not directly address the pay structure issue in detail. Rep. McGarvey emphasized that improving retention was essential to reducing backlogs and improving decision quality.

• Rep. Ramirez asked how expanded pay-setting authority for senior VA leaders would improve recruitment, particularly in rural areas. Ms. Devlin acknowledged that pay was one factor but said that mission-driven service was a primary motivator for VA employees. She noted that technical clarifications were needed in the bill regarding which positions it covered.

• Rep. Dexter questioned how long it would take the VA to complete its assessment of her homelessness bill and move the changes forward. Dr. O'Toole responded that ending veteran homelessness was a priority for the VA and stressed that housing solutions had to include wraparound clinical and support services to keep veterans housed. He did not provide a timeline or identify specific resource needs, saying further analysis was still required.

• Rep. Dexter then asked whether the VA was already accomplishing the goals of the proposed National Formulary Act and why the department viewed the bill as unnecessary. Dr. O'Toole said that the VA largely shared the bill’s goals and already had many of those practices in place. He shared that the main concern was in codifying those processes too rigidly and reducing the VA’s flexibility in medication procurement and adaptation to changing science.

• Rep. Nikki Budzinski used her time primarily to describe two bills rather than question the witnesses. She said her SAFE STEPS for Veterans Act would strengthen fall prevention for older veterans by creating a dedicated office, improving screening, and better connecting home modification programs with evidence-based services. She also described her electronic health record (EHR) modernization bill, which would impose oversight, require quality metrics, improve reporting, mandate independent verification of major IT projects, and establish a plan to sunset the program if necessary. She framed both proposals as oversight and safety measures intended to improve outcomes for veterans.

• Rep. Bergman asked whether the current law prevented accredited agents and attorneys from charging fees for helping with initial claims and whether that framework limited veterans’ access to assistance. Ms. Devlin replied that accredited representatives could still help with initial claims if they did not charge a fee and that many organizations already did so. She underlined that the VA was also trying to simplify the claims process itself so veterans would need less assistance navigating it.

• Ranking Member Takano questioned whether Project Safe Harbor had been designed to target homeless veterans and whether the VA had shifted from seeking congressional authority to pursuing guardianship through an arrangement with the Department of Justice. Dr. O'Toole responded that internal documents suggesting the program targeted homeless veterans broadly were erroneous. He said the initiative was intended only for veterans already hospitalized in VA acute care beds who lacked decision-making capacity and had no next of kin, not for broader homeless populations or outreach. He maintained that the program’s purpose was to help those veterans move through state court proceedings so they could be placed in safer settings appropriate to their needs.

• Chairman Bost asked whether giving the VA independent leasing authority would allow it to deliver medical infrastructure more quickly and efficiently. Mr. Christy agreed that it would.

• Chairman Bost then asked whether making the Under Secretary for Health and the Under Secretary for Benefits presidential appointees would improve transparency and congressional oversight. Dr. O'Toole stated that the Under Secretary for Health was already a Senate-confirmed position and that the VA believed that structure was appropriate. He did not endorse further change.

• The Chairman inquired how the VR&E Improvement and Accountability Act could improve oversight of costs and employee safety. Ms. Devlin responded that the VA supported the bill’s intent and said some provisions, such as a spending cap, would not create major operational problems. She mentioned, however, that certain technical language would need revision, including how federal funds were counted and how geographic requirements were measured.

• Rep. Conaway asked how many senior executive positions the VA currently had and raised concerns about a bill that would reduce qualification requirements for senior leadership roles. He then asked whether removing current statutory qualifications for the Under Secretary for Health could weaken the department’s leadership. Ms. Devlin said that she and Dr. O'Toole were not involved in selecting under secretaries and deferred to senior department leadership, saying that the VA supported the bill’s intent but had concerns.

• Chairman Bost concluded the hearing by emphasizing that Congress had a responsibility to review and update laws governing the VA to ensure they met the evolving needs of veterans. He restated that the proposals discussed aimed to improve accountability, transparency, and the delivery of care and benefits.

SPECIAL TOPICS

JOIN THE NIMITZ NETWORK!

Enjoying our updates? Don’t keep it to yourself — forward this email to friends or colleagues who’d love to stay informed. They can subscribe here to become part of our growing community.