The bill
CHOICE for Veterans Act of 2025
HR. 3132, 119th Congress — read as touching For-Profit Education & Student Loans.
Sponsored by
Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1]
ID: B001301
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 3132, 119th Congress — read as touching For-Profit Education & Student Loans.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
26 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 679-681 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 12 - 11.
May 5, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
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!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the esteemed members of Congress. The CHOICE for Veterans Act of 2025 is a bill that promises to "help" veterans navigate the complex process of filing claims with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). How noble.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to allow certain fee agreements for services rendered in the preparation, presentation, and prosecution of initial claims and supplemental claims for benefits under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. In other words, it's a bill that lets lawyers and agents get paid for helping veterans with their claims.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes several changes to existing law, including:
* Allowing accredited persons (i.e., lawyers and agents) to charge fees for their services * Requiring the VA to provide notice to claimants that they may be eligible for free representation from recognized organizations * Creating a system for reporting unaccredited individuals who prepare, present, or prosecute claims on behalf of veterans * Mandating online warnings about potential fees associated with hiring an agent or attorney
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include:
* Veterans and their families, who may benefit from the services of accredited persons (but also risk being taken advantage of by unscrupulous agents) * Accredited persons (lawyers and agents), who stand to gain financially from this bill * The VA, which will have to implement new regulations and procedures
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is twofold. On the one hand, it may provide some benefits to veterans who need help navigating the complex claims process. On the other hand, it creates a lucrative market for lawyers and agents to prey on vulnerable veterans.
Let's be real – this bill is not about helping veterans; it's about lining the pockets of special interest groups. The fact that Congress is trying to pass off this self-serving legislation as a "helpful" measure is an insult to our intelligence.
In medical terms, this bill is like prescribing a placebo to a patient with a serious illness. It may make the symptoms feel better for a little while, but it doesn't address the underlying disease – in this case, the corrupting influence of money and power on our legislative process.
So, let's call this bill what it really is: a cynical attempt to exploit vulnerable veterans for the benefit of special interest groups. And let's not forget the real diagnosis: Congressional Corruption Syndrome (CCS), a terminal illness that seems to afflict every member of Congress who touches this bill.
Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: B001295
Top Contributors
10
ID: S001224
Top Contributors
10
ID: V000135
Top Contributors
10
ID: H001102
Top Contributors
10
ID: A000379
Top Contributors
10
ID: V000133
Top Contributors
10
ID: R000603
Top Contributors
10
ID: M001215
Top Contributors
10
ID: N000189
Top Contributors
10
ID: F000472
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 72 nodes and 41 connections (57 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $162,435
Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.
Section 3(a)(1)(B)(i) allows individuals seeking recognition as agents or attorneys to submit applications for recognition, and Section 3(a)(1)(B)(B) permits the Secretary to charge an assessment (up to $500) from individuals seeking recognition who charge fees for claim preparation services. This creates a potential market for for-profit education providers offering training or certification programs for veterans' claims agents/attorneys to meet recognition requirements, thus benefiting the for
Section 3(a)(1)(B)(D) establishes a revolving fund in the Treasury for assessments collected from individuals seeking recognition as agents or attorneys. This fund is available to the Secretary for administration of the section, creating potential opportunities for private equity firms to invest in or manage related services, technology, or administrative support for the VA's recognition and fee agreement systems.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 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,
— 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.
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.