Gold Star and Surviving Spouse Career Services Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/3031
Last Updated: July 17, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]

ID: B001298

Follow the money

The bill

Gold Star and Surviving Spouse Career Services Act

HR. 3031, 119th Congress — read as touching Labor Unions.

The sponsor

Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$99,309 raised

27 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Veterans Affairs" section, p. 688-691 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Subcommittee Hearings Held

June 10, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate 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 bill, another exercise in legislative theater designed to make politicians look good while doing nothing of substance. Let's dissect this farce.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Gold Star and Surviving Spouse Career Services Act (HR 3031) claims to provide career services to spouses of disabled veterans and those who died in service. How noble. In reality, it's a shallow attempt to appear supportive of veterans while doing the bare minimum.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 38 of the US Code to make certain spouses eligible for services under the Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program (DVOP). It inserts "and eligible persons" into various sections, effectively expanding the program's scope. Wow, what a bold move – adding a few words to an existing law. The only notable change is the addition of a new subsection defining "eligible person." Congratulations, Congress, you managed to create a whole new section without actually doing anything meaningful.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The bill affects spouses of disabled veterans and those who died in service. Or so it claims. In reality, the primary beneficiaries will be politicians seeking to boost their "support for veterans" credentials. Lobbyists might also get a kickback or two from organizations that provide career services. As for actual veterans and their families? They'll likely see minimal benefits, if any.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It doesn't address the systemic issues plaguing veteran support services, such as inadequate funding, bureaucratic red tape, or the lack of comprehensive mental health care. Instead, it offers a token gesture to appease voters and special interest groups.

In medical terms, this bill is akin to prescribing a placebo for a patient with a terminal illness. It might make the patient (or in this case, the politician) feel better temporarily, but it won't address the underlying disease – corruption, incompetence, or sheer laziness.

To summarize: HR 3031 is a shallow attempt at appearing supportive of veterans while doing nothing to actually improve their lives. It's a classic example of legislative theater, designed to distract from real issues and make politicians look good. Don't be fooled; this bill is a farce, and its proponents are either incompetent or complicit in the charade.

Related Topics

Military & Veterans Affairs
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$99,309
25 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$19,500
Committees
$0
Individuals
$79,809

No PAC contributions found

1
ONEIDA NATION
2 transactions
$6,600
2
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
2 transactions
$6,600
3
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
4
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
1 transaction
$2,000
5
REPUBLICAN MAIN STREET PARTNERSHIP
1 transaction
$1,000

No committee contributions found

1
CARSON, RUSSELL S.
1 transaction
$6,600
2
FRANK, JIM
1 transaction
$6,600
3
DANIELS, BRANDON
1 transaction
$6,600
4
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
1 transaction
$6,534
5
LAMBERT, RYAN
1 transaction
$3,435
6
ABBOUD, ANDREW
1 transaction
$3,435
7
PETERSON, JUSTIN M
1 transaction
$3,435
8
SCAMMELL, TOBY
1 transaction
$3,435
9
BURNS, EMILY
1 transaction
$3,435
10
JOHNSON, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,300
11
PATE, LUTHER S. IV
1 transaction
$3,300
12
NESS, LARRY
1 transaction
$3,300
13
HILL, ALBERT M.
1 transaction
$3,300
14
DUIT, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,300
15
OBERNDORF, SUSAN
1 transaction
$3,300
16
DUIT, PAMELA
1 transaction
$3,300
17
HAWKINS, KAYLA
1 transaction
$3,300
18
AHLGREN, NANCY I.
1 transaction
$3,300
19
SHECHTEL, ANDREW
1 transaction
$3,300
20
GROSSMAN, JAY
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2]

ID: N000191

Top Contributors

10

1
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
2
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$2,500
Oct 13, 2024
3
YUROK TRIBE
OrganizationKLAMATH, CA
$1,000
Feb 1, 2023
4
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$1,000
Jun 9, 2024
5
EKLUND, PAUL
IndividualBOULDER, CO
$6,400
Oct 3, 2023
6
EKLUND, PAUL
P.N. EKLUND INTERESTS INC. • REAL ESTATE
IndividualBOULDER, CO
$6,400
Sep 30, 2023
7
KLARMAN, SETH
THE BAUPOST GROUP • CEO
IndividualBOSTON, MA
$3,300
Oct 18, 2024
8
GROSS, DAVID
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO • INSTRUCTOR
IndividualBOULDER, CO
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
9
WEAVER, LINDSAY
SELF • ENGINEER
IndividualPAGOSA SPRINGS, CO
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
10
BLOOM, BRADLEY
BERKSHIRE PARTNERS LLC • INVESTMENTS
IndividualWELLESLEY, MA
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 68 nodes and 30 connections (67 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $106,109

Top Donors - Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

5 Orgs20 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped.

  • +Labor Unionsconfidence 0.80

    Section 2 expands eligibility for services under the disabled veterans' outreach program to include certain spouses, which may benefit labor unions representing veterans and their families, citing subsection (e) defining 'eligible person'.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Strong
Vector: 62%
Pages: 688-691AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill expands VA career services to surviving spouses, directly supporting the Project 2025 goal of enhancing veteran and family assistance programs within the Department of Veterans Affairs."

Key themes:veteran family supportcareer services expansionDisabled Veterans' Outreach Programsurviving spouse benefitsVA program enhancement

— 655 — Department of Veterans Affairs ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Division, VHA Directive 1003, “VHA Veteran Patient Experience,” April 14, 2020, pp. 1 and B-1. 2. S. 2372, VA Mission Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress. gov/115/plaws/publ182/PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed January 30, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VA History Office, “VA History,” last updated May 27, 2021, https://www. va.gov/HISTORY/VA_History/Overview.asp (accessed January 28, 2023). 4. 38 U.S. Code § 1116, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/1116 (accessed January 28, 2023). 5. S. 3373, Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (Honoring Our PACT Act of 2022), Public Law No. 117-168, 117th Congress, August 10, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ168/PLAW-117publ168.pdf (accessed January 28, 2023). 6. H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division S, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). Known variously as the Department of Veterans Affairs Nurse and Physician Assistant Retention and Income Security Enhancement Act and the VA Nurse and Physician Assistant RAISE Act. 7. See note 5, supra.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Weak
Vector: 60%
Pages: 679-681AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on expanding career services for surviving spouses of veterans, while the Project 2025 VA policy emphasizes healthcare system reform, infrastructure, personnel management, and caregiver program consistency—there is minimal thematic overlap between career support services and the specified VA objectives."

Key themes:veteran supportfamily services

— 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.

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Weak
Vector: 60%
Pages: 618-620AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill expands career services for surviving spouses of veterans, which does not directly address Project 2025's focus on sex discrimination enforcement, pro-life workplace accommodations, or religious employer protections. Any alignment is limited to general family support themes."

Key themes:family supportcareer assistanceveteran benefits

— 585 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l Direct agencies to refocus enforcement of sex discrimination laws. The President should direct agencies to focus their enforcement of sex discrimination laws on the biological binary meaning of “sex.” PRO-LIFE MEASURES l Promote pro-life workplace accommodations for mothers. Federal law should protect life and promote pro-family policies. Current law, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act,3 provides nondiscrimination protections in the workplace for pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA)4 requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for women “to the known limitations related to the pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions,” unless “the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the [employer’s] business.” The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also provides nondiscrimination and accommodation protections in the workplace for certain pregnancy-related disability.5 None of these laws requires an employer provide health insurance benefits for elective abortion. l Pass a law requiring equal (or greater) benefits for pro-life support for mothers and clarifying abortion exclusions. Congress should pass a law requiring that to the extent an employer provides employee benefits for abortion, it must provide equal or greater benefits for pregnancy, childbirth, maternity, and adoption. That law should also clarify that no employer is required to provide any accommodations or benefits for abortion. l Keep anti-life “benefits” out of benefit plans. Some benefits attorneys and pro-choice advocates have argued since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision6 that the longstanding doctrine of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)7 preemption should block individual states’ efforts to prohibit employers from helping employees procure abortions via offering various kinds of coverage under employee-sponsored benefit plans. ERISA should not be allowed to trump states’ ability to protect innocent human life in the womb. Congress and DOL should clarify that ERISA does not preempt states’ power to restrict abortion, surrogacy, or other anti-life “benefits.” RELIGION l Provide robust protections for religious employers. America’s religious diversity means that workplaces include people of many faiths and that many employers are faith-based. Nevertheless, the Biden Administration has been hostile to people of faith, especially those with traditional beliefs — 586 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The new Administration should enact policies with robust respect for religious exercise in the workplace, including under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA),8 Title VII, and federal conscience protection laws. l Issue an executive order protecting religious employers and employees. The President should make clear via executive order that religious employers are free to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs, general nondiscrimination laws notwithstanding, and support participation of religious employees and employers as federal contractors and in federal activities and programs. l Clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions. Congress should clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions to make it more explicit that those employers may make employment decisions based on religion regardless of nondiscrimination laws. l Provide Robust Accommodations for Religious Employees. Title VII requires reasonable accommodations for an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices unless it poses an undue hardship on the employer’s business. These accommodation protections also apply to issues related to marriage, gender, and sexuality. Unless the Supreme Court overrules its bad precedent, Congress should clarify that undue hardship means “significant difficulty or expenses,” not “more than a de minimis cost” as the Court has previously held. General EEOC Reforms. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion (EEOC) does not have rulemaking authority under Title VII and other laws it enforces, yet it issues “guidance,” “technical assistance,” and other documents, including some that push new policy positions. EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions and abide by the guidance reforms dis- cussed below. l EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions. l Affirm decision-making via majority vote of Commissioners. EEOC should affirm as policy the Title VII requirement that it exercise substantive power via majority vote of Commissioners, not by unilateral Chair action or by delegation to staff.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills