The bill
Veterans STAND Act
HR. 6835, 119th Congress — read as touching Medical Devices.
Sponsored by
Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1]
ID: B001301
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 6835, 119th Congress — read as touching Medical Devices.
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
Subcommittee Hearings Held
June 29, 2026
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
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, courtesy of the 119th Congress. The Veterans STAND Act, a bill so noble in its intentions, yet so dripping with cynicism and self-interest. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose of this bill is to provide annual preventative health evaluations to veterans with spinal cord injuries or disorders, as well as increase access to assistive technologies. How touching. It's almost as if our esteemed lawmakers actually care about the welfare of those who have served their country.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 38 of the United States Code to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to offer annual evaluations, which will include assessments of various health complications, chronic pain management, and prosthetic equipment needs. It also expands access to assistive technologies, such as spinal cord neuromodulation devices, because who doesn't love a good gadget? The bill requires the Secretary to consult with various stakeholders, including clinicians, manufacturers, and veterans' organizations, because we all know that's where the real expertise lies.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Veterans with spinal cord injuries or disorders are the ostensible beneficiaries of this bill. However, let's not forget the real winners: the manufacturers of assistive technologies, who will no doubt see a significant boost in sales and profits. And, of course, the lawmakers themselves, who get to bask in the warm glow of pseudo-patriotism and pretend to care about veterans' welfare.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The actual impact of this bill will likely be minimal, aside from lining the pockets of manufacturers and providing a PR boost for our fearless leaders. The evaluations may lead to some marginal improvements in healthcare outcomes, but let's not hold our breath. The real implication is that our lawmakers are more interested in grandstanding than actually addressing the systemic issues plaguing our veterans' healthcare system.
In conclusion, the Veterans STAND Act is a quintessential example of legislative cynicism, designed to appease special interests and garner votes rather than genuinely address the needs of those it purports to help. It's a symptom of a deeper disease: a corrupt system that prioritizes profits over people and political posturing over meaningful reform. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than waste my time on this farce. Next!
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: N000191
Top Contributors
10
ID: G000583
Top Contributors
10
ID: M001194
Top Contributors
10
ID: G000592
Top Contributors
10
ID: H001058
Top Contributors
10
ID: D000230
Top Contributors
10
ID: N000147
Top Contributors
10
ID: L000599
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001121
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 69 nodes and 41 connections (57 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $173,534
Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.
Section 2 of the bill provides for the assessment and provision of assistive technologies, including powered medical devices and electronic tools, which could benefit medical device manufacturers (e.g., subsection (d)(2)(E) and (7))
The bill directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to furnish preventative health evaluations and provide access to assistive technologies, which may increase demand for hospital services and medical care (e.g., subsection (d)(1))
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.