Justice Involved Veterans Support Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/6003
Last Updated: November 19, 2025

Sponsored by

Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6]

ID: C001121

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

âś…

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Justice Involved Veterans Support Act (HR 6003) claims to address the pressing issue of incarcerated veterans by establishing a pilot program to improve documentation of their status in state prisons and local jails. How noble. The real purpose, however, is to create a feel-good narrative for politicians to peddle during election season. "We care about our veterans!" they'll cry, while doing nothing meaningful to address the systemic issues driving veteran incarceration.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill authorizes the Attorney General to establish a pilot program, in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to provide grants and technical assistance to state prisons and local jails. The goal is to improve documentation of incarcerated veterans, supposedly to facilitate better access to benefits and services. What a joke. This is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to funnel money to favored contractors and consultants under the guise of "supporting our troops."

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: politicians seeking to burnish their reputations, bureaucrats looking for new ways to justify their existence, and special interest groups angling for a piece of the action. Meanwhile, the actual veterans in question will likely see little tangible benefit from this legislation.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It does nothing to address the underlying issues driving veteran incarceration, such as inadequate mental health services, lack of support for transitioning service members, and systemic failures within the VA. Instead, it creates a new bureaucratic program that will likely become mired in red tape and inefficiency.

In short, HR 6003 is a classic example of "legislative lip service." It's a cynical attempt to appear concerned about veterans' issues while doing nothing meaningful to address them. I'd diagnose this bill with a bad case of " Politician's Disease": a chronic condition characterized by an inability to distinguish between rhetoric and reality, coupled with a severe allergy to actual problem-solving.

Treatment recommendations? None needed; this patient is terminal.

Related Topics

Civil Rights & Liberties Small Business & Entrepreneurship Federal Budget & Appropriations Congressional Rules & Procedures State & Local Government Affairs National Security & Intelligence Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement Transportation & Infrastructure Government Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

đź’° Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$74,838
28 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$0
Committees
$0
Individuals
$74,838

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

1
TOLLEY, RUSSELL C
1 transaction
$6,600
2
ANDRUS, COLLEEN
2 transactions
$6,600
3
ALVARADO, LINDA
1 transaction
$3,300
4
ALVARADO, ROBERT L. JR
1 transaction
$3,300
5
ASARCH, CHAD
1 transaction
$3,300
6
CATTO, JOHN H
1 transaction
$3,300
7
DIXON, PETER
1 transaction
$3,300
8
HARING-SMITH, WHITNEY
1 transaction
$3,300
9
LAMBERT, RYAN
1 transaction
$3,300
10
RESNICK, ERIC
1 transaction
$3,300
11
RESNICK, SARA
1 transaction
$3,300
12
BEARD, CYNTHIA
1 transaction
$3,300
13
KIRK, CLAY
1 transaction
$3,300
14
TOLLEY, RUSSELL
1 transaction
$3,300
15
BAER, RICHARD N.
1 transaction
$3,300
16
BUTCHER, JANE W.
1 transaction
$3,300
17
GREYSON, CLIFFORD RUSSELL
1 transaction
$3,300
18
POLLACK, CINTRA
1 transaction
$3,300
19
REVELLE, WILLIAM
1 transaction
$3,300
20
NAFTZER, KEITH MR.
1 transaction
$1,400
21
MORGAN, DAVID MR.
1 transaction
$1,000
22
CHAPMAN, DIANE M MS
1 transaction
$500
23
CLOSE, DAVID
1 transaction
$500
24
DOLAN, WILLIAM MR.
1 transaction
$500
25
FREDERICK, LEONARD MR.
1 transaction
$500

Donor Network - Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 29 nodes and 29 connections

Total contributions: $74,838

Top Donors - Rep. Crow, Jason [D-CO-6]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

28 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.

Introduction

Low 58.6%
Pages: 679-681

— 646 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Section 121 (developing and administering an education program that teaches veterans about their health care options available from the Department of Veterans Affairs). 4. Section 152 (returning the Office for Innovation of Care and Payment to the Office of Enterprise Integration with a joint governance process set up with the VHA). 5. Section 161 (overhauling Family Caregiver Program expansion, which has gone poorly, so that it focuses on consistency of eligibility and awareness that the most severely wounded or injured may require the program indefinitely). l Require the VHA to report publicly on all aspects of its operation, including quality, safety, patient experience, timeliness, and cost-effectiveness, using standards similar to those in the Medicare Accountable Care Organization program so that the government may monitor and achieve continuous improvement in the VA system more effectively. l Encourage VA Medical Centers to seek out relevant academic and private- sector input in their communities to improve the overall patient experience. Budget l Conduct an independent audit of the VA similar to the 2018 Department of Defense (DOD) audit to identify IT, management, financial, contracting, and other deficiencies. l Assess the misalignment of VHA facilities and rising infrastructure costs. The VHA operates 172 inpatient medical facilities nationally that are an average of 60 years old. Some of these facilities are underutilized and inadequately staffed. Facilities in certain urban and rural areas are seeing significant declines in the veteran population and strong competition for fresh medical staff. In 2018, Congress authorized an Asset Infrastructure Review (AIR) of national VHA medical markets to provide insight into where the VA health care budget should be responsibly allocated to serve veterans most effectively. However, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee lacked the political will to act on the White House’s nominations of commission members, and this ultimately led to termination of the AIR process. The next Administration should seek out agile, creative, and politically acceptable operational solutions to this aging infrastructure status quo,

Introduction

Low 58.6%
Pages: 679-681

— 646 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Section 121 (developing and administering an education program that teaches veterans about their health care options available from the Department of Veterans Affairs). 4. Section 152 (returning the Office for Innovation of Care and Payment to the Office of Enterprise Integration with a joint governance process set up with the VHA). 5. Section 161 (overhauling Family Caregiver Program expansion, which has gone poorly, so that it focuses on consistency of eligibility and awareness that the most severely wounded or injured may require the program indefinitely). l Require the VHA to report publicly on all aspects of its operation, including quality, safety, patient experience, timeliness, and cost-effectiveness, using standards similar to those in the Medicare Accountable Care Organization program so that the government may monitor and achieve continuous improvement in the VA system more effectively. l Encourage VA Medical Centers to seek out relevant academic and private- sector input in their communities to improve the overall patient experience. Budget l Conduct an independent audit of the VA similar to the 2018 Department of Defense (DOD) audit to identify IT, management, financial, contracting, and other deficiencies. l Assess the misalignment of VHA facilities and rising infrastructure costs. The VHA operates 172 inpatient medical facilities nationally that are an average of 60 years old. Some of these facilities are underutilized and inadequately staffed. Facilities in certain urban and rural areas are seeing significant declines in the veteran population and strong competition for fresh medical staff. In 2018, Congress authorized an Asset Infrastructure Review (AIR) of national VHA medical markets to provide insight into where the VA health care budget should be responsibly allocated to serve veterans most effectively. However, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee lacked the political will to act on the White House’s nominations of commission members, and this ultimately led to termination of the AIR process. The next Administration should seek out agile, creative, and politically acceptable operational solutions to this aging infrastructure status quo, — 647 — Department of Veterans Affairs reimagine the health care footprint in some locales, and spur a realignment of capacity through budgetary allocations. Specifically: 1. Embrace the expansion of Community Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs) as an avenue to maintain a VA footprint in challenging medical markets without investing further in obsolete and unaffordable VA health care campuses. 2. Explore the potential to pilot facility-sharing partnerships between the VA and strained local health care systems to reduce costs by leveraging limited talent and resources. Personnel l Extend the term of the Under Secretary for Health (USH) to five years. Additionally, authority should be given to reappoint this individual for a second five-year term both to allow for continuity and to protect the USH from political transition. l Establish a Senior Executive Service (SES) position of VHA Care System Chief Information Officer (CIO), selected by and reporting to the chief of the VHA Care System with a dotted line to the VA CIO. l Identify a workflow process to bring wait times in compliance with VA MISSION Act–required time frames wherever possible. 1. Assess the daily clinical appointment load for physicians and clinical staff in medical facilities where wait times for care are well outside of the time frames required by the VA MISSION Act. 2. Require VHA facilities to increase the number of patients seen each day to equal the number seen by DOD medical facilities: approximately 19 patients per provider per day. Currently, VA facilities may be seeing as few as six patients per provider per day. 3. Consider a pilot program to extend weekday appointment hours and offer Saturday appointment options to veterans if a facility continues to demonstrate that it has excess capacity and is experiencing delays in the delivery of care for veterans. 4. Identify clinical services that are consistently in high demand but require cost-prohibitive compensation to recruit and retain talent, and examine exceptions for higher competitive pay.

Introduction

Low 56.5%
Pages: 673-675

— 641 — 20 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Brooks D. Tucker MISSION STATEMENT The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the primary provider of health care, benefits, and memorial affairs for America’s veterans and their families. The VA has the noble responsibility to render exceptional and timely support and services with respect, compassion, and competence. The veteran is at the forefront of every VA process and interaction. The VA must continually strive to be recognized as a “best in class,” “Veteran-centric”1 system with an organizational ethos inspired by and accountable to the needs and problems of veterans, not subservient to the parochial preferences of a bureaucracy. OVERVIEW At the end of the Obama Administration, the VA was held in low esteem both by the veterans it served and by the employees who served these former warriors. Eroding morale caused by the downstream effects of a health care access crisis in 2014 led to the resignation of Secretary Eric Shinseki and extensive oversight investigations by Congress from 2015–2016. By 2020, however, the VA had become one of the most respected U.S. agencies. This significant progress was due in part to the leadership of Secretary Robert Wilkie (2018–2021) and his team of political appointees and career senior executives, many of them veterans, who led the effort to ensure that the VA became “Veteran-centric” in its governance decisions and fostered a more positive work environment. This mindset translated into a department that was better attuned to employees’ and veterans’ needs and experiences in the daily operations of health care, benefits, — 642 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and memorial affairs. During that period, the VA received the largest number of watershed congressional authorizations to reform its health care and benefits that it had received since the post–Vietnam War years along with historic increases in annual appropriations, which have tripled since the last full year of the George W. Bush Administration. The current VA leadership team of Biden appointees has adopted some of their predecessors’ governance processes. However, they have not sustained the previous Administration’s commitment to a genuine “Veteran-centric” philosophy, most nota- bly with respect to the delivery of health care, and harbor a bias toward expanding the unionized federal employee workforce that has not always been aligned with a focus on “Veteran-centric” care. There also is growing concern in Congress and the veteran community that the VA is poorly managing and in some cases disregarding provisions of the VA MISSION [Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Out- side Networks] Act of 20182 that codify broad access for veterans to non-VA health care providers. Efforts to expand disability benefits to large populations without adequate planning have caused an erosion of veterans’ trust in the VA enterprise. Additionally, the current VA leadership is focusing very publicly on “social equity and inclusion” within departmental policy discussions toward ends that will affect only a small minority of the veterans who use the VA. For the first time, the VA is allowing access to abortion services, a medical procedure unrelated to military service that the VA lacks the legal authority and clinical proficiency to perform. In addition to continuing the grotesque culture of violence against the child in the womb, these sociopolitical initiatives and ideological indoctrinations distract from the department’s core missions. DEPARTMENTAL HISTORY Following the Civil War, state veterans homes were established to provide med- ical and hospital treatment for all injuries and diseases. When the United States entered World War I in 1917, “Congress established a new system of Veterans benefits, including programs for disability compensation, insurance for service personnel and Veterans, and vocational rehabilitation for the disabled”3 that was overseen by three different federal programs: the Veterans Bureau, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Pensions, and the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers. In 1921, Congress combined those programs into the Veterans Bureau. Following World War II, a national VA hospital system, much of which remains operational today, was established to care for millions of returning veterans. Following the Vietnam War, the VA’s federally owned and operated hospital network expanded again to meet the needs of the volunteer and draftee population. In the past two decades, the VA has purposely transitioned to leasing medical prop- erties rather than building expensive new facilities that can take years to complete and often experience budget overruns. As the nature of health care has evolved

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.