Senate (S. 4744) and House (H.R. 9237) proposed legislative veteran-related omnibus bills were introduced into Congress on June 10, 2026.
The twin bills are titled: the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act.
According to the legal description, they are meant to amend titles 10 and 38 of the U.S. Code and to address long-standing priorities for disabled veterans, service members, survivors, caregivers, military families and VA staff.
My Opinion: I used the word “omnibus” because both S. 4744 and H.R. 9237 bills are 554 pages long. These bills encompass over sixty (60) independent pieces of bipartisan legislation into a single omnibus bill.
For many years, military service organizations, like the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) and the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), have witnessed proposed legislation, like the Major Richard Star Act and the Love Lives on Act, blocked in Congress by elected officials who believe these Acts cost too much.
By packaging these sixty (60) bills into one “omnibus” bill, the legislators are “attempting to streamline the legislative process and ensure veterans receive these benefits that they have earned.”
It is true that the Taking Care of America’s Veterans Act will address long-standing gaps in financial security, healthcare delivery, and housing access for millions of military families.
My main concern, utilizing my best Oklahoma-terminology, is: if Congress was too “cheap” to fund the Major Richard Star Act for 55,000 disabled veterans, why would Congress be willing to fund all the other “benefits” related to in the other 59 Acts encompassed in the omnibus bill?
The answer lies with the DAV National Legislative Staff, who meticulously read and comprehended what the “political poison pill” was in the bill. That “political poison pill” is known as the “PAYGO Provision.”
The PAYGO is a “budget enforcement mechanism that requires any new legislation increasing mandatory spending or reducing revenues to be offset by equivalent reductions in mandatory spending or increases in revenues, preventing net deficit growth.”
Simply stated, any new spending for veterans’ disability compensation benefits must be balanced (or offset) by cuts to existing veteran benefits.
However, in the past, Congress has regularly and repeatedly chosen to ignore or waive PAYGO rules and statutes for legislation when it was the priority of Congress.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Analysis estimated that in order to provide all the veteran compensation benefits contained in S. 4744 and H.R. 9237, the VA would have to cut benefits for up to 1.5 million veterans and reduce future disability compensation by as much as $5.7 billion dollars in the next ten (10) years.
Where are the proposed cuts to existing veteran benefits? Well, just for starters, the VA would effectively stop compensating veterans for the impact of service-connected tinnitus.
The VA would also reduce compensation for most disabled veterans suffering from sleep apnea if they use a medical device (CPAP) while sleeping.
These two (2) changes would apply to all new claims as well as any reassessments or reevaluations of existing claims. Eliminating disability compensation for sleep apnea and tinnitus is not a reflection of improved outcomes for veterans. This is a budget-driven decision!
“Correcting this injustice for combat-injured veterans should be done without depriving other veterans of benefits they need and deserve, which this Republican package would do,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, referring to the introduction of S. 4744 and H.R. 9237 into Congress.
The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) is urging members of Congress to reject S. 4744 and H.R. 9237.
The AFGE believes that the proposed legislation would undercut earned benefits for our nation’s military veterans, strip workplace rights and protections from thousands of psychologists at the Department of Veterans Affairs, and push more veterans outside the VA for their health care.
Another provision in the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act would significantly expand the use of private, for-profit health care, despite several reports concluding that uncontrolled outsourcing by the VA is putting veterans’ care at risk.
“Pushing more veterans to go outside the VA for their care increases costs to taxpayers while diminishing the quality of care that our veterans deserve to receive. I don’t think that’s any way to take care of America’s veterans, and I urge lawmakers to reject this bill when it comes up for a vote,” AFGE National VA Council President MJ Burke said.
“If Republicans insist on an offset (PAYGO) in funding, which actually is unnecessary,” continued Marine Corps Veteran Blumenthal, “then it should come from the Department of Defense (War), which has trillions of dollars available.”
“In fact, the relevant programs are part of the Department of Defense (War), not the VA,” concluded Blumenthal. “The resources to pay for these wounds of war could come from the Department of Defense, not other disabled veterans. I will continue to fight for the Major Richard Star Act.”
“Once again, we find ourselves in the regrettable position of having to defend the benefits that disabled veterans earn through their service and sacrifice,” said Disabled American Veterans (DAV) National Commander Coleman Nee. “This is wrong, and it must be stopped.”
In summary, the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act places budgetary considerations above the well-being of all veterans who served.
John Plahovinsak is a 32-year retired Army veteran who served from 1967 to 1999. He is the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) Department of Ohio’s Hospital Chairman and Adjutant of Chapter #63 (Clermont County). He can be contacted at: plahovinsak@msn.com.
Subscribe to The Clermont Sun today!
https://www.clermontsun.com/subscribe