In a letter to VA Secretary Denis McDonough, House Veterans’ Affairs Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill., and the House Appropriations Committee’s veterans panel Chairman John Carter, R-Texas, accused department leaders of “misinforming Congress” and “inciting a panic among veterans about their benefits being delayed or cut.” They said the misleading information undermines public faith in the institution.

In September, lawmakers approved a $3 billion stopgap spending bill for the VA after officials had warned that benefit checks could be delayed or halted on Oct. 1 — the start of the new fiscal year — if additional cash reserves were not made available to the department.

Weeks earlier, VA leaders — including McDonough — said the budget shortfall came as a result of record-high benefits approvals and medical services usage by veterans in the last fiscal year.

Congress moves to fix VA budget gap, but time is running out

They also warned that Congress needed to pass another $12 billion in funding to cover extra costs in fiscal 2025, an issue the two chambers were expected to bring up upon lawmakers’ return after the election.

But earlier this week, in an update provided to congressional leaders, VA officials said they carried over roughly $5 billion in unspent funds related to benefits accounts from last fiscal year to this fiscal year. Even without the cash infusion approved in September, the department would have held more than $2 billion in cash reserves.

Still, VA leaders said in a memo to lawmakers that the budget infusion was needed “because if we had even been $1 short, we could not certify our payment files and more than 7 million veterans and survivors would have had delays in their disability compensation, pension, and education benefits.”

In a statement Friday afternoon, VA press secretary Terrence Hayes echoed that message.

“Out of an abundance of caution last fiscal year, VA requested additional benefits funding ... Those veterans and survivors rely on those monthly payments, and any delay could have been devastating for them and their families – and that was not a risk that we were willing to take,” he said.

A VA spokesperson said that the funding was designed to avoid that kind of “worst-case scenario” and that VA carried over far less money this year than in previous years.

Still, Bost questioned whether the urgency emphasized by VA leaders in recent weeks was sincere.

“VA leaders repeatedly told us that benefits funding was on the verge of running out and veterans could be harmed,” he said in a statement separate from the letter. “But it turns out that was never true.”

In their update to Congress, VA leaders also said that department health care accounts are not draining as quickly as anticipated, although they anticipate still needing some extra funding to cover the additional workload on the system.

VA saw its highest level of health care appointments ever in fiscal 2024: about 127.5 million, up 6% over the previous fiscal year. More than 796,000 veterans have enrolled in VA health care over the last two years, up 37% over the previous two years.

But it is not clear if that influx of new patients will require the full $12 billion estimated by VA planners earlier this year.

Bost and Carter in their letter lamented the “erroneous” estimates given to lawmakers in recent months and promised a full investigation into the budgeting confusion.

Congress is expected to return to Washington later this month to finish up the current session, before newly elected members are seated in January. Unfinished work includes resolving the federal budget plan for the rest of fiscal 2025. Departments are currently operating under a short-term budget extension set to expire in December.

Senior Judge Paul Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday granted the release request as part of a lawsuit brought by American Oversight, a non-partisan, nonprofit group dedicated to getting the government to release records.

The group sued for the records to be made public following a Freedom of Information Act request.

“With the election just two weeks away, the American people have a clear and compelling interest in knowing how the government responded to an alleged incident involving a major presidential candidate who has a history of politicizing the military,” Chioma Chukwu, the group’s interim executive director, said in a statement following the order.

The legal fight stems from Trump’s visit to the storied military cemetery on Aug. 26.

Lawmakers demand Army sanction Trump over Arlington Cemetery visit

The former commander-in-chief and Republican nominee for president visited the site as part of an event commemorating the anniversary of the deaths of 13 U.S. servicemembers in a terrorist bombing at the Hamid Karzai International Airport in 2021, during the chaotic final days of the American military mission in Afghanistan.

At the invitation of some of those survivors’ family members, Trump took part in a wreath laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, then visited Section 60 of the cemetery, where many troops killed in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are buried.

Shots of Trump smiling and giving a thumbs-up sign alongside service members’ tombstones were later used in campaign spots. In addition, Army officials said, an employee who attempted to stop campaign workers from filming in the area “was abruptly pushed aside” by a Trump campaign staffer.

That individual — who has not been publicly identified — opted not to press charges. Army officials decried the incident, since Trump was warned that “federal laws, Army regulations and DOD policies … clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds.”

But they also said they would not pursue any further reprimands or punishments, and did not disclose any further details of the incident. Several Democratic lawmakers have called for a full release of the Army’s report on the visit.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and his staff has released several statements from families of fallen troops involved in the visit who praised the former president for his kindness and attention to their struggles.

Trump campaign officials also initially promised to release video proving that they followed all appropriate cemetery rules, but have thus far declined to provide any such proof.

The unreleased Army records could provide more insight into the level of confrontation between Trump staffers and cemetery staff on the day, and whether the former president helped calm or inflame the situation.

Tuesday’s court order calls for Army officials to make public “responsive, non-exempt records,” which could allow service officials to continue shielding the identity of the employee who claimed to have been assaulted.

Army officials did not provide an immediate timeline of how the information may be released to the public.

The move is a significant boost to the issue of groundwater contamination issues at bases around the country and follows on Harris’ work in President Joe Biden’s administration to better address military toxic exposure issues.

Harris’ support for the Veterans Exposed to Toxic PFAS Act — sponsored by Michigan Democrats Sen. Debbie Stabenow and Rep. Dan Kildee — came as part of a broader announcement of Latino-focused policies featured in her presidential campaign.

The legislation would require Veterans Affairs officials to provide “health care services and benefits to veterans exposed to PFAS at military installations.”

VA to research link between PFAS chemicals and kidney cancer

The chemicals — used in a host of products like water-repellent clothing and firefighting foams — have been used widely on military bases for the last 50 years and are suspected to be the cause of a host of medical complications, including testicular cancer and thyroid disease.

Last month, VA leaders announced plans to research the link between kidney cancer and exposure to the chemicals, a move that could eventually provide presumptive benefits to thousands of veterans suffering from the illness.

But the Harris-backed legislation would speed up that process, specifically designating exposure to PFAS as a service-connected injury. That distinction is key to ensure eligibility for veterans benefits.

The bill specifically singles out ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, testicular cancer, kidney cancer, high cholesterol and pregnancy-induced hypertension as conditions believed to be linked to PFAS exposure.

Family members of veterans stationed at bases where PFAS contamination was present could also be eligible for medical care from VA under certain conditions.

Outside advocates have estimated that as many as 700 American military bases worldwide have some level of PFAS contamination issues, potentially impacting hundreds of thousands of troops, veterans and their family members.

Officials with Harris’ campaign said she will also commission an assessment to investigate “the linkages between PFAS and illnesses impacting our service members.”

Two years ago, Biden signed the Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act (PACT Act) which granted new disability benefits and medical care options to veterans who suffered illnesses from burn pit smoke, Agent Orange exposure and other chemical contaminations while in the ranks.

Those PACT Act provisions were a key focal point of Biden’s re-election campaign and have also been an issue of emphasis for Harris during military and veterans events.

President Donald Trump, Harris’ Republican opponent in the presidential campaign, has not publicly weighed in on the PFAS issue.

In a media roundtable Friday morning, officials from the Vet Voice Foundation — which works closely with the Democratic Party — criticized lawsuits in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Michigan filed by the Republican National Committee questioning the integrity of overseas ballots and suggesting that some could be fraudulent.

The Pennsylvania suit alleges that state officials have moved “to exempt [overseas voters] entirely from any verification requirements,” calling it “an illegally structured election process.”

Six Republican members of Congress from Pennsylvania signed onto the legal challenge. One of those, Rep. Guy Reschenthaler, said in a statement that the current process is “unlawfully diluting the rightful ballots of the brave men and women who serve our nation and their family members” by allowing questionable ballots.

Trump claims Dems will ‘cheat’ using military, overseas ballot system

Party officials have said they are not trying to block military votes from overseas, and do not believe the election challenges will have that effect.

But Democratic critics said their political opponents have not provided any evidence of fraud in the overseas voting process, and said they believe the real intent of the lawsuits is to cause confusion and distrust.

“Teams of people from both parties go through a meticulous list of steps to verify the vote count and check for accuracy,” said Janessa Goldbeck, CEO of Vet Voice Foundation. “These baseless allegations undermine public trust in our election system, and worse, target the very people who have sworn to protect our Constitution.”

The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, passed in 1986, requires that states provide a system for military members, their eligible family and overseas citizens to vote absentee in federal elections.

Nearly 3 million U.S. citizens living abroad are eligible to vote in the November 2024 elections. Less than 4% of that total voted in the 2022 U.S. elections.

Rules regarding absentee ballots vary by state, but generally must be received by Election Day to be counted.

“Each state, including Pennsylvania, has strict laws governing voter registration, verification and ballot transmission to ensure that only eligible citizens vote,” Goldbeck said. “The idea that this process lacks oversight is simply untrue.”

Nearly all overseas ballots have already been mailed out, further complicating questions about eligibility and election security. It’s unclear whether any of the lawsuits will be settled or dismissed ahead of Election Day, which is Nov. 5.

That’s one of the preliminary findings from Army researchers conducting baseline cognitive screenings in an effort to better track — and prevent — brain injuries among troops.

The project, which kicked off in August, created a database of troops’ normal brain functions to provide health officials with a baseline to compare against soldier brains following long deployments, head trauma or other potential damaging incidents. Officials are currently screening new enlistees and individuals in some high-risk jobs, with the goal of reaching all troops by fall 2026.

The service also plans to re-screen soldiers every few years.

“There are times that service members may sustain or have a cognitive change that they have not even recognized yet,” Dr. Steven Porter, a neuroscientist at the U.S. Army Office of the Surgeon General working on the project, said Tuesday at the Association of the U.S. Army’s annual conference. “What the testing will be able to do for us is to identify that change and catch it early, so we can prevent any sort of ongoing or continued injury.”

Army launches cognitive screening to track new soldiers’ brain health

The project is still in its early phases, so plans for new training schedules, new equipment development and new recovery programs for injured troops are still mostly theoretical.

But Sgt. Maj. Chris McNamara, human weapon system expert at Army Special Operations Command, told reporters during a presentation at the AUSA conference that preliminary data from blast sensors and brain screenings have started to show activities that cause low-level problems in troops’ heads, giving commanders tools to intervene early.

“When we used to go to our shooting ranges, we would stack [those sessions] all together so that you got training density,” he said. “Now most of our leaders, because they have better decision support tools with a blast profile, spread that out. Now it’s one day every week. And the blast density is lower, and they get more time to recover.”

Col. Jama VanHorne-Sealy, director of the Army’s Occupational Health Directorate, said officials hope to release a new servicemember brain health strategy next spring.

“What that strategy seeks to do is to address the brain health needs of the warfighter, to optimize brain health in multiple environments … and to address the readiness of the force and force health protection against known and emerging hazards,” she said.

“It’s important for the Department of Defense and for the Army to have solutions that really allow us to do the best that we can, to triage personnel, to diagnose folks in austere environments so that we can make smart practice decisions about how to best take care of warfighters.”

From 2000 to 2022, nearly 460,000 servicemembers were diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury during training or in combat, according to the Defense Department Inspector General. Officials said finding ways to treat those issues earlier could result in long-term benefits for individuals and force readiness.

The book — which Trump has already publicly decried — also details extensive death threats by Trump supporters against former Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley after he had a public falling out with the commander-in-chief.

Milley also expressed concern that Trump could recall him to active duty to put him on trial for treason if he is re-elected to office, a plan that Woodward writes Trump considered for other critical former military leaders during his first term in the White House.

“No one has ever been as dangerous to this country as Donald Trump,” Milley told Woodward in a 2023 interview for the book, entitled “War,” a copy of which was obtained by Military Times ahead of its release this week.

Milley says he’ll ensure family safety after Trump’s execution remark

The volume chronicles the end of Trump’s presidency and the last four years of Joe Biden’s time as commander-in-chief. It’s critical of both men but more so of Trump, suggesting that numerous military leaders worry about his potential return to the Oval Office.

Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, said in a statement to the Associated Press that none of the stories in Woodward’s books are true and called the publication “the work of a truly demented and deranged man who suffers from a debilitating case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

Woodward in the book that Milley paid to install bulletproof glass and blast-proof curtains at his home because of threats stemming from Trump supporters, even though he has been given around-the-clock security from federal agencies since his military retirement.

He also detailed to Woodward multiple behind-the-scenes incidents where Trump asked to use U.S. military forces on American soil, potentially in violation of federal law.

This weekend, during a Fox News interview, Trump suggested he may use National Guard and active-duty military forces against “radical left lunatics” he claims are working to undermine stability in America. He has also suggested using the military to respond to immigration problems.

Mattis served as secretary of defense from 2017 to 2019, one of five men to serve in the post during Trump’s four years in the White House. Woodward writes that Mattis viewed Trump as erratic, and worried that he may order drastic military action without fully considering the consequences.

Woodward has previously written four books about the Trump presidency, to which the former president has largely had negative reactions.

Justices likely won’t rule on the case — Bufkin v. McDonough — for months. But the issues involved are being closely monitored by veterans advocates and Department of Veterans Affairs leaders, given the potential changes mandated by the eventual decision.

At issue is how the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and other judicial review boards must interpret the “benefit of the doubt” rule regarding veterans disability claims. Under federal statute, VA adjudicators are required to rule in favor of veterans applying for benefits support “when there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence.”

Advocates have long argued that VA does not follow that standard, requiring veterans to prove their injuries and eligibility beyond doubt to receive payouts.

Supreme Court rules in favor of veteran who sued over GI Bill limits

In 2002, Congress passed legislation requiring the Veterans Appeals Court to ensure the “benefit of the doubt” rule was followed properly in the disability claims process. But court officials have argued that only applies in cases of clear errors, and does not mandate a full review of the case evidence.

The case before the Supreme Court centers on two veterans: Joshua Bufkin, who served in the Air Force from 2005 and 2006, and Norman Thornton, who served in the Army from 1988 to 1991. Both men applied for disability benefits related to injuries they say occurred while serving.

Bufkin was denied a claim for post-traumatic stress disorder, while Thornton was granted a 10% rating for the same condition. Both appealed the decisions and lost.

Lawyers for the men said that subsequent judicial reviews did not conduct a full review of the case, to include whether the “benefit of the doubt” standard was followed. A federal appeals court ruled two years ago that such a move was not needed.

In arguments before the Supreme Court Tuesday, Melanie Bostwick, counsel for the plaintiffs, said that the language adopted by Congress clearly mandates that an appeals panel “has to do a check and make sure that the decisions that it is about to affirm complied with the law.”

But lawyers for the government argued that requiring a full additional review of evidence would be duplicative and inefficient.

In a supporting brief filed ahead of Wednesday’s arguments, officials from the National Veterans Legal Services Program lamented that federal officials’ current practices “have ensured that it is the agency that gets the benefit of the doubt, not veterans … it exacerbates the very problems Congress sought to solve through its [legislation].”

Similarly, officials from Disabled American Veterans offered support for the plaintiffs and said the case “presents a question that is important to the nation’s disabled veterans and their families,” calling the current review procedures “troubling.”

A final decision on the case is expected from the Supreme Court next spring.

The upgrades were announced Tuesday morning by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who said the effort was undertaken “to redress the harms done by ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ and other policies on these former service members.”

The review was prompted by complaints among veterans that the process for upgrading discharge status was overly complicated and adversarial.

The changes mean that those veterans for the first time will be able to access certain VA education, health and financial benefits, a potential windfall for them and their families.

The military’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy was put in place in 1993 as a compromise to allow some level of military service for gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals. But advocates said the policy was enforced erratically and discriminatorily, and forced those troops to keep secrets about their personal lives from friends and commanders, to the detriment of unit cohesiveness.

Pentagon to revisit ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ discharges

Nearly 13,500 service members were forced out of the military under the policy, according to Defense Department records.

The policy was repealed in 2011, allowing LGBT individuals to serve openly in the ranks for the first time. In his statement Tuesday, Austin said that because of military review policies in recent years, 96% of the individuals forced out of the service under the law have now been awarded honorable discharge status.

“We will continue to honor the service and the sacrifice of all our troops, including the brave Americans who raised their hands to serve but were turned away because of whom they love,” he said. “We will continue to strive to do right by every American patriot who has honorably served their country.”

Defense officials said individuals eligible for upgrades because of the most recent review will be contacted by department staffers on next steps for getting appropriate paperwork and benefits applications.

Veterans Affairs leaders and congressional officials in recent years have pointed to the proposed medical lease sites as a valuable tool in expanding care options for veterans.

But the roughly $670 million set aside by lawmakers for those 15 projects was not enough to pay for the planned spaces, according to preliminary bids. And since getting that news, officials for months have been unable to move ahead on the process for getting new bids on the projects, largely due to behind-the-scenes concerns over pricing guidelines.

The stalled projects are located in 12 different states, including two in Texas and three in Florida. Fourteen are potential new outpatient clinics, while one in Tampa, Fla., is a planned community living center.

Vets’ PACT Act claims continue to rise, two years after law’s passage

As part of the PACT Act — sweeping veterans benefits legislation signed into law in August 2022 — Congress authorized and funded 31 new major VA leases, designed to expand medical and support service options for veterans across the country. In all, the projects were expected to provide 2.8 million square feet of additional health care space and serve more than 3.6 million veterans in coming years.

At the time of the legislation’s passage, VA officials touted the authorizations as a win for veterans, allowing planners to move faster in creating new medical spaces than the traditional construction and facility acquisition process.

Since June 2023, one lease has been awarded and 15 more are in the final steps of being approved, according to department officials.

VA press secretary Terrence Hayes acknowledged that “for the remaining 15 leases, VA has received offers that exceeded authorized funding levels, which VA cannot accept under law.”

That means officials will have to rework and resubmit those proposals to lawmakers with new parameters and cost guidelines before moving ahead. Congressional committees will have to grant final approval on any substantial changes before they can proceed.

Hayes said the money set aside for the work does not expire, so the delays do not endanger funding for the projects.

But individuals familiar with the process told Military Times that VA and Office of Management and Budget officials have been sparring since early spring over methodology for calculating rates and cost adjustments, a bureaucratic fight that has set back the project.

OMB officials did not return requests for comment on the matter. VA officials would not comment on correspondence with OMB leaders.

The technical fight has repeatedly pushed back opportunities to move ahead with the search for new locations for the clinics, even as VA officials have emphasized the need for more medical options for veterans. Congressional staff said they expected the new leases to be submitted for approval months ago, and are unsure exactly where VA and the White House stand in the current process.

If the new leases aren’t approved by the end of the year, the process could be forced to start over completely under a new administration and Congress, pending the results of the November elections.

That could mean months more waiting for the leases to be approved and even longer for facility staff opening doors to provide care to veterans. As it stands, even if the projects do move ahead in the next few weeks, it’s unlikely that doors for the new clinics will open before mid-2025.

Hayes said department leaders remain “fully committed to providing timely access to world-class care at these sites, and we are exploring all possible options, including working with Congress, to move forward on these leases.”

VA officials have not released completion dates for any of the PACT Act lease projects, or when they expect to resubmit paperwork to Congress on the problematic ones.

The agency’s decision, based on federal estimates of private-sector wages, sets the rate of increase not only for Social Security beneficiaries but also military retirees and individuals receiving veterans benefits. The increase will go into effect in January.

In a statement, Commissioner of Social Security Martin O’Malley said the cost-of-living increase will “help tens of millions of people keep up with expenses even as inflation has started to cool.”

But the 2.5% rate is well below what retirees and beneficiaries have enjoyed in recent years. The mark was 3.2% in 2023, 8.7% in 2022 and 5.9% in 2021.

Vets benefits to mirror Social Security cost-of-living boost

For a veteran receiving $1,500 a month in disability payouts, a cost-of-living adjustment of 2.6% would mean an extra $38 a month. In 2023, the increase meant a boost of around $48 a month for that same veteran.

About 5 million veterans and 2 million military retirees receive benefits checks each month through the Department of Veterans Affairs. Last month, lawmakers passed legislation tying the increase in those benefits to the Social Security rate, an annual requirement that is typically non-controversial.

The cost-of-living increase would apply to payouts for disability compensation, clothing allowances and dependency and indemnity benefits, as well as some other VA assistance programs.

About 68 million Americans receive Social Security benefits. Agency officials said the average beneficiary will receive a boost of about $50 a month under the adjustment.

Social Security staffers will begin notifying individuals about the changes to their benefits by mail starting in early December.

Pentagon officials have said more than 100 U.S. troops were diagnosed with brain injuries following a missile attack at the Ain al-Asad base in Iraq in January 2020. The assault came in response to the American killing of Iranian Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani in Iraq a few days earlier.

While the missiles did not directly strike any U.S. forces, the barrage of strikes caused dizziness, sensitivity to light, nausea and other traumatic brain injury symptoms in dozens of troops stationed there, Defense Department officials said. In some cases, the effects lasted for weeks or months, and multiple troops had to be evacuated to Germany for medical treatment.

Most casualties from recent attacks in Middle East are brain injuries

On Tuesday, when asked by a reporter if he wished he had been tougher on Iran, given the severity of the injuries incurred in that attack, Trump downplayed the result.

“What does ‘injured’ mean?” he said. “You mean because they had a headache? Because the bombs never hit the fort…”

“None of those very accurate missiles hit our fort. They all hit outside. There was nobody hurt, other than the sound was loud. Some people said that hurt, and I accept that.”

Nearly 80 troops received Purple Hearts for injuries related to the attack, most connected to traumatic brain injury. An inspector general report released in November 2021 hinted the number of injuries may have been even higher, because military officials did not properly document all of the troops’ health issues.

Trump’s comments drew immediate criticism from Democratic Party officials and prompted condemnation from Gov. Tim Walz during the vice presidential debate on Tuesday night.

Trump also claimed at the event that “there was nobody ever tougher” towards Iran than him. Walz, who served 24 years in the Army National Guard, disputed that at the debate in New York a few hours later.

“Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than they were before because of Donald Trump’s fickle leadership,” Walz said. “And when Iranian missiles did fall near U.S. troops and they received traumatic brain injuries. Donald Trump wrote it off as ‘headaches.’”

Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate and a Marine Corps veteran, did not directly address the military injuries in his comments but blamed President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris — the Democratic nominee for president — for weak policies toward Iranian aggression.

Trump has previously downplayed the severity of the Iranian missile attack against U.S. military forces. In the days following the attack, while he was still president, Trump called the injuries “not very serious” and labeled the damage caused as “minimal.”

The records intrusions were first reported by the Washington Post. In a statement, VA press secretary Terrence Hayes said the matter was referred to Justice Department investigators as soon as VA leaders were made aware of the issue.

“We take the privacy of the veterans we serve very seriously and have strict policies in place to protect their records,” he said. “Any attempt to improperly access veteran records by VA personnel is unacceptable and will not be tolerated.”

Neither campaign has made any public comments on the matter. The Washington Post reported the records involved included medical files but not disability or other benefits information.

Here are all the veterans running for Congress in 2024

Walz, the current Democratic governor of Minnesota, served for 24 years in the Army National Guard. Vance, a Republican senator from Ohio, served in the Marine Corps for four years.

Both men have talked about their interactions with veterans services and benefits while on the campaign trail. Vance has publicly acknowledged that he used VA health care after leaving the active-duty ranks. It is not known if Walz ever accessed the medical system.

In a letter to department employees in August, VA Secretary Denis McDonough warned that privacy rules regarding veterans records must be followed to maintain the trust of patients and families.

“Viewing a veteran’s records out of curiosity or concern — or for any purpose that is not directly related to officially authorized and assigned duties — is strictly prohibited,” he wrote. “Failure to comply with these requirements may result in disciplinary action, including removal, as well as referral to law enforcement for civil penalties and criminal prosecution.”

Vance and Walz are scheduled to appear together at their only debate of the election cycle on Tuesday night in New York City.

Republican lawmakers decried the findings as abhorrent and evidence that department planners are still improperly preventing veterans from getting quick medical care outside of the VA healthcare system.

But senior VA leaders said they are committed to providing patients with the best care possible, and promised a full review of the incidents to correct the mistakes and potentially punish the administrators involved.

The report, released Friday afternoon, focused on veterans receiving care through the VA Western New York Healthcare System over the last two years.

Investigators found that local leaders “failed to resolve significant community care scheduling delays for patients with serious health conditions, despite providers’ and community care staff’s efforts to advocate on the behalf of patients.”

Changes to VA’s community care program raise concerns about vets’ health care access

Community care — where veterans can receive medical appointments and treatments at private-sector clinics but have the expenses covered by VA — has been a controversial topic in recent years, with conservatives claiming that department bureaucrats unnecessary limit those outside options.

In the New York investigation, the inspector general found that at least 42 patients had significant delays in accessing that care, despite facing serious health conditions that mandated fast action.

“For three of the 42 patients, the scheduling delay affected the provider’s management of the patient’s condition, and for 9 of the 42, the delay affected the patient’s clinical status or condition,” the report states.

In one case, a veteran with esophageal cancer had radiation therapy incorrectly denied for several months before dying from the illness. Investigators said the treatments would not likely have saved the individual, but a faster response “would likely have decreased the level of pain and improved the quality of life in the patient’s final months.”

In another case, a young veteran experiencing seizures waited more than 300 days for a consult to be scheduled, even as the patient was hospitalized several times a month for related health issues.

“Leaders failed to consistently focus on patients, respond to staff concerns, get to the root cause of concerns regarding delayed scheduling of urgent consults, and predict and eliminate risks before causing patient harm,” the report stated.

In response to the findings, “VA immediately transferred the medical center director and the chief of staff out of clinical- and veteran-facing positions pending the results of an investigation,” VA press secretary Terrence Hayes said in a statement.

“It is unacceptable for any veteran to have their care delayed, which is why we are taking immediate corrective actions to prevent this from happening again.”

Republican lawmakers demanded a full detailing of what that promise means.

“Community care is VA care, and I won’t let VA bureaucrats restrict it,” House Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill., said in a statement. “It is unacceptable that VA is allowing its own leadership and failures to yet again lead to patient harm.”

Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee ranking member Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, expressed similar concerns.

“The lapses in care described in this report cannot be ignored,” he said in a statement. “VA must answer to Congress, veterans and the American people by acting without delay to hold leadership and staff accountable through conducting an immediate national review of backlogged consults everywhere.”

In fiscal 2023, VA approved more than 7.8 million community care appointments, totaling more than $31 billion. That was up about 17% from the previous year, and represented nearly one in every six medical appointments covered by VA that year.

But Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have sparred in recent years over whether VA is doing enough to ensure that veterans are presented with non-department medical options when facing delays in care.

The inspector general said in the New York cases they reviewed, the delays occurred because “the community care team lacked a process to address time-sensitive, high-risk consults and had no standard operating procedures.”

They also said officials “were unfamiliar with community care basic processes and were not following all national standards” for approving such care.

The report recommends a full review of system leaders’ decisions regarding the delays, as well as overhauling procedures for approving such requests in the future.

The full report is available on the inspector general’s website.

This year’s field boasts 72 incumbents, 18 women and 55 individuals who started their military careers after January 2000. Fifty-six of the candidates are Democrats, while 132 are Republicans.

Below is a list of those congressional hopefuls sorted by state, with biographical data on each. Military Times will be tracking each of these races on Election Day and be following each of the winners as they enter the 119th session of Congress next January.

Fewer vets will be on the November ballot for Congress this year

Editor’s note: Seven states do not have any veterans who won a primary contest. They are Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota and Wyoming. Independent candidates who did not win a primary matchup were not included in this list.

Alabama

House

District 1: Barry Moore (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1990s

Member of the House Agriculture and Judiciary committees.

District 1: Tom Holmes, Democrat

Branch: Navy Reserve, 1960s

Retired state worker and advocate for the developmentally disabled.

Arizona

House

District 2: Eli Crane (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 2000s–2010s

Combat deployments: Afghanistan

Member of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee.

District 4: Kelly Cooper, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 1990s

Owns three restaurants and credits his success to the Marine Corps.

District 8: Abraham Hamadeh, Republican

Branch: Army Reserve, 2010s–2020s

Unsuccessfully ran for Arizona Attorney General in 2022.

9: Quacy Smith, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 1990s–2000s

Currently a bishop with Grace Unlimited International Church.

Senate

Ruben Gallego, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Vocal member of the House Armed Services Committee now running for Senate.

Arkansas

House

District 1: Rick Crawford (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s

Member of the House Intelligence Committee.

District 1: Rodney Govens, Democrat

Branch: Army, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Works as a court advocate for abused and neglected children.

District 2: Marcus Jones, Democrat

Branch: Army National Guard, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

His assignments included serving as program director at NATO’s Joint Warfare Centre in Norway.

District 3: Steve Womack (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1970s–2000s

Serves on the House Budget Committee and appropriations’ defense subcommittee.

California

House

District 2: Chris Coulombe, Republican

Branch: Army & Marine Corps, 2000s–2010s

His assignments included running the Army’s Pacific Theater Air Assault School.

District 4: Mike Thompson (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Army, 1960s–1970s

Combat Deployments: Vietnam

Received a Purple Heart with the 173rd Airborne Brigade, was an airborne school instructor.

District 5: Mike Barkley, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 1960s

Has run unsuccessfully for Congress six times.

District 7: Tom Silva, Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s–2010s

Worked as veterans program coordinator at University of the Pacific.

District 8: Rudy Recile, Republican

Branch: Army National Guard 1980s–2010s

Also worked as a civilian in the Department of Agriculture.

District 9: Kevin Lincoln II, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s

Served in the White House Military Office on Marine One.

District 19: Jimmy Panetta (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Navy Reserve, 1990s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Son of former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

District 21: Michael Maher, Republican

Branch: Navy, 2000s

Served on the submarine USS Salt Lake City in support of overseas operations.

District 24: Salud Carbajal (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps Reserve, 1990s

Born in Mexico, he served eight years in the military before his political career.

District 26: Michael Koslow, Republican

Branch: Air Force National Guard, 2000s–2010s

Also worked as a civilian in the Department of Defense Inspector General’s office.

District 27: Mike Garcia (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy & Navy Reserve, 1990s–2010s

Had more than 30 combat sorties during the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

District 31: Gil Cisneros, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2000s

Served as Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness under Biden.

District 32: Larry Thompson, Republican

Branch: Army Reserve, 1960s–1970s

Worked as a Hollywood talent manager.

District 35: Mike Cargile, Republican

Branch: Army, 1990s

Worked as an actor and manager for an indie music label.

District 36: Ted Lieu (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Air Force & Air Force Reserve, 1990s–2010s

Member of the House Foreign Affairs and Judiciary committees.

District 39: David Serpa, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 2010s–2020s

Founded his own real estate company.

District 45: Derek Tran, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Son of refugees who fled Vietnam.

District 48: Darrell Issa (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s–1980s

Served in the U.S. House for 18 years until 2019, then won re-election again in 2021.

District 50: Peter Bono, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1970s–2000s

Volunteers time to help disabled veterans with benefits claims.

Colorado

House

District 6: Jason Crow (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Army, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Served as a prosecutor during Trump’s first impeachment trial.

District 6: John Fabbricatore, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1990s

Retired after 26 years as an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officer.

District 8: Gabe Evans, Republican

Branch: Army & National Guard, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Trained as a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter pilot.

Connecticut

House

District 1: Jim Griffin, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s

Lost his bid for this seat in the 2020 Republican primary.

District 2: Mike France, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s-2000s

Served four terms as a state representative.

Senate

Matthew Corey, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s

Worked as a postal service employee and has run several restaurants.

Florida

House

District 2: Neal Dunn (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s

Completed his medical internship at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

District 5: Jay McGovern, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 1980s–2010s

Served as a naval aviator aboard multiple aircraft carriers.

District 6: Michael Waltz (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army & National Guard, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Green Beret was a regular Fox News contributor before joining Congress.

District 7: Cory Mills (Incumbent), Republican,

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Bosnia

Spent time in Iraq and Afghanistan as a diplomatic consultant with the State Department.

District 9: Thomas Chalifoux, Republican

Branch: Army, 1960s–2000s

Self-funded his congressional bid.

District 13: Anna Paulina Luna (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force & National Guard, 2000s–2010s

One of five female veterans currently serving in the House.

District 14: Robert Rochford, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–2010s

Former commander of Naval Beach Group One.

District 16: Vern Buchanan (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air National Guard, 1970s

Sits on the House Ways and Means committee.

District 17: Greg Steube (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Serves on the House Veterans’ Affairs and Oversight committees.

District 17: Manny Lopez, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1980s

Disabled veteran who suffered a neck injury during grenade training.

District 18: Scott Franklin (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy & Navy Reserve, 1980s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Bosnia

Flew combat missions over Bosnia and Kosovo.

District 21: Brian Mast (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Lost both legs in an IED attack in Afghanistan.

District 25: Christopher Eddy, Republican

Branch: Air Force Reserve, 1980s–2010s

Worked 13 years as an FBI Intelligence Manager.

District 28: Phil Ehr, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 1980s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Founded a nonprofit to counter disinformation in U.S. politics.

Senate

Rick Scott (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1970s

Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Georgia

House

District 2: Sanford Bishop Jr. (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Army, 1960s–1970s

Has served in Congress since 1992.

District 3: Maura Keller, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1970s–2000s

Retired lieutenant colonel who also worked in the Atlanta VA healthcare system.

District 4: Eugene Yu, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s–1980s

Also worked as a firefighter and police officer.

District 7: Rich McCormick (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Served as the department head for emergency medicine in Kandahar.

District 7: Bob Christian, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Has also worked as a sports reporter, baker and restaurant executive.

District 9: Andrew Clyde (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy & Navy Reserve, 1980s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Serves on the House Homeland Security Committee

District 11: Barry Loudermilk (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1980s–1990s

Serves on the House Financial Services Committee.

District 11: Katy Stamper, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1970s–1980s

Has received criticism for her close ties to Republican lawmakers and groups.

District 13: Jonathan Chavez, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Worked as the non-commissioned officer in charge of a joint service medical team in Iraq.

District 14: Shawn Harris, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps & National Guard, 1980s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Served as director of Joint Staff for the Army National Guard.

Hawaii

House

District 1: Patrick Largey, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1980s-2000s

Head of maintenance for a 43-story high rise building.

Senate

Bob McDermott, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 1980s–1990s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Worked as executive director of the Honolulu Navy League.

Illinois

House

District 7: Chad Koppie, Republican

Branch: Army, 1960s

Pilot who worked for Delta Airlines for 35 years.

District 12: Mike Bost (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 1970s–1980s

Current Chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee.

District 13: Joshua Lloyd, Republican

Branch: Army & National Guard, 2010s–2020s

Graduated from West Point in 2022.

Indiana

House

District 4: Jim Baird (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1960s–1970s

Combat Deployments: Vietnam

Earned a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts while serving with the 523rd Transportation Company.

District 4: Derrick Holder, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 1990s–2000s

Worked as a paralegal in the Indiana Department of Child Services.

District 5: Deborah Pickett, Democrat

Branch: Army Reserve, 1980s

Her brother-in-law is a Medal of Honor recipient.

Senate

Jim Banks, Republican

Branch: Navy Reserve, 2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Has served in the House since 2017.

Iowa

House

District 1: Mariannette Miller-Meeks (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army & Army Reserve, 1970s–1990s

Served as the first female president of the Iowa Medical Society.

District 3: Zach Nunn (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force & National Guard, 2000s–2020s

Combat Deployment: Afghanistan

Served on the White House’s National Security Council prior to Congress.

District 3: Lanon Baccam, Democrat

Branch: Army National Guard, 1990s–2000s

Combat Deployment: Afghanistan

Oversaw veterans programs within the Department of Agriculture.

Kansas

House

District 3: Prasanth Reddy, Republican

Branch: Air Force Reserve, 2000s–2020s

Still serving as a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force Reserve.

Kentucky

House

District 2: Brett Guthrie (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s–1990s

Eight-term congressman is a West Point grad.

District 5: Hal Rogers (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1950s–1960s

Dean of the House, he has served in Congress since 1981.

Louisiana

House

District 3: Clay Higgins (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1970s–1980s

Prominent member of the House Freedom Caucus.

Maine

House

District 1: Ronald Russell, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s–2000s

An Airborne Ranger and a Special Forces qualified Green Beret.

District 2: Jared Golden (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Serves on the House Armed Services Committee.

Senate

Demi Kouzounas, Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s

Longtime dentist was also chairwoman of the Maine Republican Party.

Maryland

House

District 1: Andrew Harris (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy Reserve, 1980s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Still-practicing physician served in the Navy Medical Corps.

District 1: Blane Miller III, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2000s

Later worked as a deep-water technical diver testing military equipment.

District 3: Rob Steinberger, Republican

Branch: Navy Reserve, 1990s–2000s

Founder of a financial consulting firm.

Massachusetts

House

District 4: Jake Auchincloss (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Sits on the House Transportation Committee and select panel on China.

District 6: Seth Moulton (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Ran for the Democratic nomination for president in 2019.

Senate

John Deaton, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 1990s–2000s

Worked as a trial advocacy instructor at the Naval War College.

Michigan

House

District 1: Jack Bergman (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Marine Corps & Guard/Reserve, 1970s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Vietnam

Served as commanding general of Marine Forces Reserve.

District 7: Tom Barrett, Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 2000s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Narrowly lost a bid for this congressional seat in 2022.

District 10: John James (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Sits on the House Foreign Affairs and Energy committees.

Senate

Mike Rogers, Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s

Previously served in the House from 2001 to 2015.

Minnesota

House

District 2: Joe Teirab, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Worked as an assistant U.S. Attorney, focused on narcotics trafficking and violent crime.

District 3: Tad Jude, Republican

Branch: Army Reserve, 1970s

Was the youngest individual ever elected to the Minnesota Legislature, at age 20.

Mississippi

House

District 1: Trent Kelly (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War & Iraq

Chairman of the House Armed Services’ seapower subcommittee.

District 2: Ronald Eller, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s–1990s

Works in cardiac and thoracic surgery at St. Dominic’s Hospital.

Senate

Roger Wicker (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force Reserve, 1970s–2000s

Ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee

Ty Pinkins, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Community organizer who has focused on unfair pay practices.

Missouri

Senate

Lucas Kunce, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Led a police training team in the Sunni Triangle while deployed to Iraq.

Montana

House

District 1: Ryan Zinke (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Served as Secretary of the Interior under Trump.

District 2: Troy Downing, Republican

Branch: Air National Guard, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Served in a Combat Search and Rescue squadron.

District 2: John Driscoll, Democrat

Branch: Army National Guard, 1960s–2000s

Has worked as a wildland firefighter, a public utility regulator, and a writer.

Senate

Tim Sheehy, Republican

Branch: Navy, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Founded an aerospace firm and still works as a firefighting pilot.

Nebraska

House

District 2: Don Bacon (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1980s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Chair of the House Armed Services Committee’s quality of life panel.

Nevada

House

District 1: Mark Roberson, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s-2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq, Afghanistan

Taught at National Defense University.

District 2: Mark Amodei (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s

Serves on the House Appropriations Committee.

Senate

Sam Brown, Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Severely burned in a roadside bomb attack in Kandahar.

New Hampshire

House

District 2: Maggie Goodlander, Democrat

Branch: Navy Reserve, 1990s–2000s

Served as counsel in the first impeachment of former president Trump.

New Jersey

House

District 1: Theodore Liddell, Republican

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Manages his own law practice.

District 3: Herbert Conaway Jr., Democrat

Branch: Air Force, 1990s

Taught at a community hosptial before running for state legislature.

District 9: Billy Prempeh, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 2000s–2010s

Has twice run for the same seat without success.

District 11: Mikie Sherrill (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2000s

Sea King helicopter pilot flew missions throughout the Middle East.

New Mexico

House

District 1: Steve Jones, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s

Worked as a management consultant and executive in the energy industry.

New York

House

District 1: Nicholas LaLota (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 2000s–2010s

Sits on the House Armed Services Committee.

District 6: Thomas Zmich, Republican

Branch: Army Reserve, 1980s–1990s

Worked as a construction manager.

District 12: Mike Zumbluskas, Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s

Has been a member of the Reform and Independence parties in the past.

District 13: Ruben Vargas, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1970s–1990s

Advocate who has been active with the International Chess Federation.

District 15: Gonzalo Duran, Republican

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

CEO of a firm focused on veterans reintegration into civilian life.

District 18: Pat Ryan (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Army, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Serves as vice ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.

District 22: Brandon Williams (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s

Served as the strategic missile officer on board the USS Georgia.

District 25: Gregg Sadwick, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–1990s

Owner of a collision shop and countertop company.

North Carolina

House

District 1: Donald Davis (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Air Force, 1990s

Helped coordinate Air Force One operations at Andrews Air Force Base.

District 1: Laurie Buckhout, Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Led an 800-person battalion task force as part of the initial attack into Iraq in 2003.

District 2: Alan Swain, Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Flew AH-1 Cobras and AH-64 Apache helicopters.

District 4: Eric Blankenburg, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1970s–1980s

Currently working as a technology consultant.

District 8: Justin Dues, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps, 2000s–2010s

Founder of a firm specializing in wearable technology.

District 10: Pat Harrigan, Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

A Green Beret with multiple combat tours in Afghanistan.

District 10: Ralph Scott Jr., Democrat

Branch: Air Force, 2010s

Sixth great-grandson of James Madison.

District 12: Abdul Ali, Republican

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Past chairman of the Cabarrus County Republican Party.

District 14: Pamela Genant, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1990s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Worked as a conference coordinator with the Homeschool Alliance of North Carolina.

North Dakota

House

District 1: Trygve Hammer, Democrat

Branch: Marine Corps & MC Reserve, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Former airline pilot and security consultant.

Ohio

House

District 1: Orlando Sonza, Republican

Branch: Army, 2010s

Currently the executive director of the Hamilton County Veterans Service Commission.

District 3: Michael Young, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1960s

Worked as a real estate developer and singer-songwriter.

District 6: Michael Kripchak, Democrat

Branch: Air Force, 2000s

Worked in the Air Force’s quantum computing initiatives while in service.

District 7: Max Miller (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Marine Corps Reserve, 2010s–2020s

Former deputy campaign manager for presidential operations under Trump.

District 8: Warren Davidson (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s–1990s

Took the seat of former House Speaker John Boehner.

District 12: Jerrad Christian, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 2000s

Works as a software engineer, but has used his Navy meteorology skills as a climate activist.

District 15: Mike Carey (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1980s–1990s

Was elected to Congress in a 2021 special election.

District 15: Adam Miller, Democrat

Branch: Army Reserve, 1990s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Serves in the Ohio House of Representatives.

Oregon

House

District 4: Monique DeSpain, Republican

Branch: Air Force & AF Reserve, 1980s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Kosovo

Served as a lawyer with the Judge Advocate General’s Corps for 30 years.

Pennsylvania

House

District 1: Ashley Ehasz, Democrat

Branch: Army, 2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Could become the first female graduate of West Point to serve in Congress.

District 4: David Winkler, Republican

Branch: Army & Marine Corps, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Former CEO of the veterans charity Wings for Warriors.

District 5: Alfe Goodwin, Republican

Branch: Army & Army National Guard, 2000s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Philadelphia police officer served alongside her brother in Iraq.

District 6: Chrissy Houlahan (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Air Force, 1980s

Daughter and granddaughter of career naval officers.

District 10: Scott Perry (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 1980s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Serves on the House Transportation and Foriegn Affairs committees.

District 14: Guy Reschenthaler (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Sits on the House Foreign Affairs committee.

District 14: Chris Dziados, Democrat

Branch: Army, 2000s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Was involved in the development of Space Force while serving in the Pentagon.

District 17: Chris Deluzio (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Navy, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

First-term congressman serves on the House Transportation Committee.

District 17: Rob Mercuri, Republican

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.

Senate

David McCormick, Republican

Branch: Army, 1990s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Gulf War

Former Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs.

South Carolina

House

District 2: David Robinson II, Democrat

Branch: Army, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Became an advocate for missing persons after his son’s disappearance in Arizona.

District 2: Joe Wilson (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army Reserve, 1970s

Member of the House Armed Services Committee.

District 3: Sheri Biggs, Republican

Branch: Air National Guard, 2010s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Afghanistan

Commissioned in the Air Force at age 40 after a nursing career.

District 4: William Timmons (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard, 2010s

Member of the House Republican Steering Committee.

Tennessee

House

7: Mark Green (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army & Army Reserve, 1980s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Served on the mission where Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was captured.

Texas

House

District 2: Daniel Crenshaw (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, Active, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Navy SEAL lost an eye in an IED blast in Afghanistan.

District 3: Keith Seif (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1970s–2000s

Served in Joint Staff assignments in U.S. European Command and NATO.

District 4: Pat Fallon (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1980s–1990s

Was a member of the 1988 Notre Dame football team which won a national championship.

District 6: Jake Ellzey (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Piloted the H-60 Seahawk helicopter, F-14 Tomcat, F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet.

District 8: Morgan Luttrell (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Brother of Marcus Luttrell, whose military service inspired the movie “Lone Survivor.”

District 11: August Pfluger (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Former F-22 pilot who served on President Trump’s national security council staff.

District 13: Ronny Jackson (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Former White House physician was demoted after retirement for improper conduct while on duty.

District 14: Rhonda Hart, Democrat

Branch: Army, 2000s

Lost her daughter in a 2018 school shooting in Santa Fe.

District 22: Troy Nehls (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army National Guard & Reserve, 1980s–2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Has faced criticism for improperly wearing a Combat Infantry Badge.

District 23: Tony Gonzales (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Sits on the House Appropriations and Homeland Security committees.

District 26: Ernest Lineberger III, Democrat

Branch: Navy, Active, 1980s–1990s

20-year career with Texas Instruments as an industrial engineer.

District 28: Jay Furman, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2010s

Served as a naval aviator.

District 36: Brian Babin (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Air Force & Air National Guard, 1970s

Earned his dental degree while in the service.

District 38: Wesley Hunt (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Served as an AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopter pilot.

Utah

House

District 3: Glenn J. Wright, Democrat

Branch: Air Force, 1960s–1970s

Combat Deployments: Vietnam

Worked as a safety consultant.

Vermont

Senate

Gerald Malloy, Republican,

Branch: Army, 1980s–2000s

Worked as a business executive for a variety of defense-related firms.

Virginia

House

District 2: Jennifer Kiggans (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, Active, 1990s–2000s

Currently serves on the House Armed Services and Veterans’ Affairs Committees.

District 2: Missy Cotter Smasal, Democrat

Branch: Navy, 2000s

Executive Director for Valor Run, a non-profit that hosts running events to honor military women.

District 3: Bobby Scott (Incumbent), Democrat

Branch: Army National Guard & Reserve, 1970s

Dean of Virginia’s congressional delegation.

District 3: John Sitka III, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1970s–1990s

Former merchant mariner has been involved in advocacy for those careers.

District 5: John McGuire, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–1990s

Former Navy SEAL.

District 6: Ken Mitchell, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1970s–1990s

Worked as a White House advisor for both George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

District 7: Derrick Anderson, Republican

Branch: Army, 2000s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Serves as a Green Beret and a member of the “Old Guard” at Arlington National Cemetery.

District 7: Eugene Vindman, Democrat

Branch: Army, 1990s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Former White House NSC advisor, brother of Trump impeachment witness Alexander Vindman.

District 8: Jerry Torres, Republican

Branch: Army & National Guard, 1970s–2000s

Served in Army Special Forces as a Green Beret.

District 11: Michael Van Meter, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–1990s

Spent 20 years in various roles at the FBI.

Senate

Hung Cao, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Former special operations explosive ordnance disposal officer.

Washington

House

District 2: Cody Hard, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s

Worked as an aircraft mechanic while in the ranks.

District 3: Joe Kent, Republican

Branch: Army, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Husband of Shannon Kent, a sailor who was killed in fighting in Syria.

District 4: Jerrod Sessler, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1980s–1990s

Former NASCAR driver who competed in Northwest Series events.

District 6: Drew MacEwen, Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s

After the military, founded a financial services firm.

District 10: Don Hewett, Republican

Branch: Air Force, 1980s

Worked as an engineer for Boeing and Microsoft.

West Virginia

House

District 2: Steven Wendelin, Democrat

Branch: Navy & Navy Reserve, 1980s–2020s

Combat Deployments: Iraq

Former networks manager for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

Wisconsin

House

District 3: Derrick Van Ordern (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Navy, 1990s–2010s

Combat Deployments: Iraq & Afghanistan

Authored the book “A Navy SEAL’s Guide to the Lost Art of Manhood.”

District 5: Scott Fitzgerald (Incumbent), Republican

Branch: Army, 1980s–2000s

Serves on the House Financial Services and Judiciary committees.

But veteran representation in the halls of the Capitol is expected to remain much higher than in the public at large. Currently, about 6% of the U.S. population has served or is serving in the military. In comparison, about 18% of House and Senate lawmakers spent time in the ranks.

Advocates say that’s good news, since veterans bring important perspectives to key issues facing congressional responsibilities.

Here are all the veterans running for Congress in 2024

“That type of lived experience is invaluable when it comes to national security debates,” said Allison Jaslow, CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “It’s essential to have a decent amount of veterans in office to protect the military, track veterans’ issues first-hand.

“There are plenty of civilians who do good work on issues like mental health and veterans care, but individuals who have lived it are more likely to engage thoughtfully on them.”

Fewer veteran candidates

In 2022, 196 candidates with military backgrounds won primaries for House and Senate races. Of that group, 97 — 17 Senate candidates and 80 House hopefuls — won their races.

This year, the number of primary winners who are veterans is down almost 5%, to 188. The smaller pool means the number of November election victors is also likely to drop.

Veteran representation in Congress peaked in the 1970s, when the number of veterans in both chambers reached 400. But after the introduction of the all-volunteer military force, both the number of veterans in America and the number running for Congress dropped steadily.

In 1980, more than 29 million veterans were living in the United States. Today that total is less than 18 million.

That population change is largely to blame for the decrease in congressional numbers. In 1986, the number of veterans who won congressional elections fell below 300 for the first time in almost four decades. It dropped below 200 for the first time in 1996. In 2014, it fell below 100.

The 116th Congress, which began in 2021, opened with 91 veterans among its members, the lowest total since the end of World War II. Depending on the outcome of races this year, the total for next year’s Congress could slip below that benchmark.

Even as the totals have dropped, the number of younger veterans mounting — and winning — congressional bids has grown in recent years.

In 2018, 54 veteran candidates started their military careers before 1980, versus 44 who joined the military after 2000. This year, 55 veteran candidates started after 2000, against 41 who signed onto military service before 1980.

Of the 79 candidates this cycle with a combat zone deployment, 65 of them served in Iraq, Afghanistan or both.

Breaking down the number of veterans in the 118th Congress

Understanding the military

About 70% of the candidates with military experience are running as Republicans. That’s slightly higher than in recent years, with GOP candidates usually averaging about 65% of the field.

But Jaslow — who served with the Army in Iraq — said some of the shared political background of those candidates can blunt the partisan divide between the major parties.

These are people who have already sacrificed and served on behalf of their country,” she said.

House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill. — a Marine Corps veteran himself — said his panel’s work depends on that first-person perspective.

“There are non-veterans on the committee too, but if you’re a disabled veteran, or a decorated veteran, there is a different understanding,” he said.

“The combat veterans on the committee in particular have always been a great help, because they have had to maneuver the Veterans Affairs health care system themselves. There’s just so much more wisdom that’s available from their experiences.”

Ten of the committee’s 25 members are military veterans. Two are among the seven women veterans serving in the House and Senate.

With Trump pick, JD Vance is first post-9/11 vet on major party ticket

The presidential factor

Not included in the list of congressional candidates are the two vice presidential nominees — Democrat Tim Walz and Republican JD Vance — both of whom served in the military.

Vance enlisted in the Marine Corps after graduating high school and served a four-year stint as a combat correspondent, during which he escorted civilian press and wrote articles for a military news service. He deployed to Iraq in 2005.

Walz served 24 years in the Minnesota National Guard, deploying to Europe in support of overseas operations in Afghanistan. His departure from the military months ahead of his unit’s deployment to Iraq has become a point of contention on the campaign trail.

This year marks the first time since 2004 that both major party presidential tickets have included a candidate with military experience. In that race, it was the presidential hopefuls themselves, Republican George W. Bush and Democrat John Kerry.

“Having two candidates who are both veterans and both post-9/11 veterans, that’s an exciting moment for our country,” Jaslow said. “And it sends a message.”

Whether that veteran vice president will have fewer veteran colleagues in Congress or a larger caucus to work with will be decided by voters on Nov. 5.

The system is not designed to replace 911 calls or emergency room visits for veterans who are seeking immediate, life saving help, department leaders said. But the tele-emergency options can provide answers for medical questions from veterans who are worried they may be heading towards an emergency situation and are unsure of what to do next.

“Every veteran can feel like they have a doctor in the family now,” said Dr. Neil Patel, acting director of the VA National Emergency Medicine Office, during a rollout of the new program.

“Veterans can simply pick up the phone to call VA, and we can give them advice on what to do and where to go for care,” Patel added. “It’s bringing emergency care and advice into a veteran’s home, rather than asking veterans to always go to an ER.”

VA delays rule change on how it pays veterans’ air ambulance services

The tele-emergency care program was launched earlier this year with pilot programs in separate sections of the country. Medical providers working the calls can access veterans’ medical records and other relevant biographical information if callers are already in the VA health care system.

Of the more than 61,000 callers so far this year, about 59% had their medical questions resolved without the patient having to travel to an urgent care clinic or hospital, officials said.

Patel said in one case, a veteran called complaining of dizziness and lightheadedness. He had considered traveling to a hospital to be evaluated, but the nearest one was an hour away.

“So, by talking to him and reviewing his charts, we were able to figure out that his prostate medication was increased about a week earlier,” he said. “This is a pretty common side effect … so we provided him with an education about when to take this medication and how to best avoid the side effects.

“When we checked up on him a couple days later, he was doing great, and so, so thankful that he didn’t need to figure out how to get to an ER and spend hours waiting there.”

Patel said officials can connect veterans with local emergency services if they determine a patient’s condition is too serious to be dealt with through a phone call or video chat.

He acknowledged that the idea of emergency care may feel uncomfortable to some veterans, but said the effort is designed to give patients more options for their care, and not to replace needed emergency visits.

“It’s really just as simple as giving us a call, so we can get veterans the right care,” he said.

Unlike 911, the specific call in numbers for the VA tele-emergency care vary from state to state. A full list of contacts is available on the department’s website.

Senate lawmakers approved the move on a voice vote without any objections one week after House members similarly advanced the measure without opposition. President Joe Biden is expected to sign the legislation into law in the next few days.

About 5 million veterans and 2 million military retirees receive benefits checks each month through the Department of Veterans Affairs. The COLA increase legislation would apply to payouts for disability compensation, clothing allowance, dependency and indemnity benefits, as well as some other VA assistance programs.

Vets may see only a small cost-of-living boost in benefits next year

Although a non-controversial proposal, the legislation linking veterans benefits to Social Security increases is an annual responsibility of Congress. Without it, beneficiaries would see their payouts remain flat, even as other federal support programs were granted increases.

In a statement after the House passage, bill sponsor Rep. Morgan Lutrell, R-Texas, called the measure a critical step to ensuring disabled veterans remain financially healthy.

“Our veterans gave everything to defend our freedoms, and it is our duty to ensure they receive the care and compensation they deserve,” he said.

The Social Security increase last year was 3.2%, down from 8.7% in 2023 — the highest such raise in 40 years. Federal officials will announce the 2025 rate on Oct. 10.

Officials from the Senior Citizens League in August estimated that the figure is likely to be around 2.4%, based on analysis of economic conditions. If correct, that would be the lowest cost-of-living boost since 2020, when the rate was 1.3%.

If a link is established, the move would mark the first time the department provided fast-track benefits for any condition related to PFAS exposure.

The chemicals — used in a host of products like water-repellent clothing and firefighting foams — have been used widely on military bases for the last 50 years and are suspected to be the cause of a host of medical complications, including testicular cancer and thyroid disease.

‘It’s scary as hell’ — PFAS exposure a ‘widespread’ problem for troops, families nationwide

In a statement released Wednesday, department officials said the move is part of a broader review of suspected military toxic exposure injuries which started with the passage of the PACT Act in August 2022.

“We want to understand the health conditions that veterans are living with so we can provide them with all of the benefits they deserve, and that’s what this review process is all about,” VA Secretary Denis McDonough said.

“As a result of this scientific review, we may be able to make kidney cancer a presumptive condition for Veterans exposed to PFAS, thus lowering the burden of proof on these veterans.”

Presumptive status allows veterans applying for benefits to skip paperwork establishing their condition as a result of military service. That can cut months or years of wait times off the benefits process.

Department officials have already established presumptive benefit status for kidney cancer in cases where veterans served around burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan, or if they were stationed at North Carolina’s Camp Lejeune between the 1950s and 1980s.

But no such connection has been formally recognized with PFAS chemical exposure in the military. Individual veterans can petition VA adjudicators to consider their illnesses and their personal exposure to the toxins, but blanket coverage for all veterans is not yet in place.

Department officials did not say how long the review will take. VA staff will host a public listening session on the issue on Nov. 19, and will solicit veterans’ comments on the issue through the Federal Register.

McDonough in his statement said veterans “should not wait for the outcome of this review to apply for the benefits and care they deserve,” and urged individuals to reach out with disability claims as soon as possible.

More information on applying for disability benefits is available through the VA website here.

Researchers from the RAND Epstein Family Veterans Policy Research Institute also found that nearly one in 10 adults in America provided some level of caregiver services to a veteran or wounded military member in the last two years, a much higher figure than seen in past surveys.

About 14.3 million individuals — 5.5% of the U.S. adult population — are currently serving as military and veteran caregivers, according to the institute’s estimates. Report authors said the value of the services they provide ranges from $199 billion to $485 billion, when taking into account the range of support and medical services they provide.

“Few are compensated in any way for this care,” they wrote. “In fact, caregivers are monetarily penalized: Over a quarter of military and veteran caregivers reported that, because of caregiving, they had cut back the hours they work, switched jobs, quit working or left school early, or felt that they were discriminated against at work.”

White House pledges caregiver support, but VA program’s future unclear

Fewer than half of individuals surveyed reported getting accommodations at work to account for their extra role as a veteran or military caregiver. More than a quarter though they were discriminated against at work because of the extra demands of their home life.

The report — produced in cooperation with the Elizabeth Dole Foundation — represents the most comprehensive review of the caregiver community in years and advocates for more financial aid, mental health care and community support for those caregivers.

“According to the survey estimates, military and veteran caregivers who cut back on their work or schooling because of caregiving lose approximately $10,000 in household income in a given year,” the authors wrote.

“And caregivers are struggling: Between 50 and 70 percent of military and veteran caregivers have difficulty paying bills, and 22 to 40 percent are food insecure.”

Caregivers of younger veterans are also at higher risk of depression and less likely to seek care than non-caregivers. Researchers found that 43 percent of military and veteran caregivers to injured individuals aged 60 or younger met the criteria for depression, almost four times the rate of the general population.

The advocates said federal and community resources need to better tailor their support services to individual groups’ needs.

For example, caregivers of veterans under 60 were more interested in finding joint activities to conduct with their injured loved ones. Caregivers of veterans over 60 were more focused on “programs that help keep the recipient safe and help with filling out forms.”

The report’s release comes just a few weeks after 11 veterans groups petitioned the White House to speed up decisions on the future of VA’s Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers, the rules of which have been under review for more than two years.

More than 30,000 families are enrolled in that program, which provides stipends and assistance services to caregivers of seriously injured veterans. But thousands of those were threatened with removal from the program when eligibility criteria was updated two years ago.

VA leaders paused those expulsions until another review could be finished, but that has still not yet been finished. The groups warned that “further delay, layered with a change in presidential administration, would only serve to prolong the strain that so many veterans and caregivers have felt while PCAFC continues to fall short of its intent and potential.”

Report authors said they hope the latest research will serve as an additional incentive to move along those reforms, as well as bring other government resources into the conversation about how best to help caregivers.

The full report is available on the Rand website.

On Tuesday, officials from the non-partisan group With Honor and lawmakers from the For Country Caucus gathered near the Washington Monument to plant flags along the National Mall as a reminder of the estimated 325,000 military families currently struggling with hunger and financial hardship.

According to a 2023 study by Rand researchers, nearly 26% of active-duty service members are considered food insecure, and about 15% rely on food stamps or food banks to help support their families.

More troops would be eligible for new allowance under DOD proposal

“There are a lot of contributing factors for the military recruiting crisis, but one of them is we’re not paying junior enlisted well enough so that they can live without food stamps,” said Rye Barcott, co-founder and CEO of With Honor. “To have a strong military, we need to treat our people the right way.”

Tuesday’s event comes as lawmakers are considering a host of provisions in the annual defense authorization bill that could help with those financial issues.

House lawmakers have proposed pay raises of up to 19.5% for troops ranked E-4 and below next year, bringing nearly all service members’ base salary above $30,000 a year. Senate lawmakers have proposed a 4.5% pay raise for all troops and an additional 1% boost for troops ranked E-3 and below.

Advocates at Tuesday’s event said either move would help, but pushed for a larger pay raise for young military families given the known pressures they face.

The measure also includes boosts in other stipends, as well as changing the formula for food stamp eligibility to allow more military families to receive that assistance.

Rep. Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif. and sponsor of the food stamp eligibility provision, said at the flags event that he’s working to build awareness of the problem with his colleagues and is hopeful Congress will act on the issues later this year.

“It’s embarrassing that there are military men and women and their families who are on food stamps, but it’s our job to make sure that they at least have access to them when they need them,” he said.

He took time to plant several flags with Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., who expressed similar optimism on the annual defense authorization bill.

“We ask our service members to do a lot, to sacrifice a lot, and ask their families to sacrifice a lot,” he said. “We should provide them at least with the bare minimum, with respect to things like food.”

Lawmakers are expected to break later this week for a month ahead of the November congressional elections. But House and Senate leaders have said they hope to pass a final compromise authorization bill sometime in November or December.

Lawmakers want Veterans Affairs leaders to better secure the department’s suicide prevention hotline amid a spate of short-term outages in the emergency lifeline, even though officials have insisted those challenges have not resulted in widespread problems for operations.

On Monday, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., released a letter to VA Secretary Denis McDonough asking for “a more comprehensive review of the system’s reliability and resilience, backup and redundancy procedures, and related areas to ensure (the crisis line) is available every second of every day.”

“While it appears that in each recent incident the department … acted quickly to resolve the technology issues, rerouted calls, attempted to re-engage all dropped calls or chats, the volume of problems is concerning,” he wrote.

Most VA police have not finished veteran suicide prevention training

The letter’s release comes during National Suicide Prevention Month and just a few days after a House Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing into the hotline’s operations.

Dr. Matthew Miller, executive director of VA’s Office of Suicide Prevention, testified Sept. 18 that the Veterans Crisis Line has suffered 12 “noteable outages” in the last 12 months, down from the fiscal 2023 total. Most of those were the result of technology issues outside of VA’s operations.

About 700 callers were affected by those outages, and roughly 500 were reconnected with specialists after a short delay, according to VA officials. Others called back on their own, but staffers acknowledged that not every caller was brought back into the system.

The missed calls represented less than 0.1% of the total call volume to the crisis line last year. Since a national 988 number was established in July 2022 for suicide intervention, Veterans Crisis Line operators have seen a nearly 23% increase in calls and nearly 77% increase in texts from individuals seeking emergency mental health aid.

“We know that we’re saving veterans’ lives,” Miller told lawmakers. “Two published studies recently have found veteran callers were over five times more likely to have less distress and less suicide ideation at the end of the call compared to the beginning, were 11 times more likely to have reduced suicidal urgency at the end of the call than the beginning.”

But he acknowledged the need to improve the system even more.

“These outages (in the last year) varied in scope and impact,” he said. “However, none of them incapacitated Veterans Crisis Line services. Our commitment to modernization and improvement is critical to ensuring it can promptly respond when interruptions do arise.”

Lawmakers on the House panel echoed that sentiment while also encouraging veterans to reach out for help if needed, despite the system’s rare lapses. Tester asked for officials to share specific steps they plan on implementing to analyze past outages and coordinate with other federal agencies to prevent future ones.

About 17 veterans a day die as a result of suicide, according to the latest statistics from VA researchers.

On Sunday, congressional leaders announced plans for a short-term budget extension to fund federal operations through Dec. 20. The money would allow for minimal disruption in federal programs and services through the fall elections and provide a chance for the newly elected White House administration to weigh in on the full federal budget later this year.

House leaders had hoped for a longer budget extension and extra provisions on voting security in their initial budget bill drafts, but those plans failed to gain enough support to move ahead.

If lawmakers don’t approve the compromise plan by Oct. 1, it could trigger a partial government shutdown, delaying paychecks for military members and shuttering some nonessential Defense Department and Veterans Affairs services.

In a letter to House colleagues on Sunday, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said “shutting the government down less than 40 days from a fateful election would be an act of political malpractice” and urged chamber members to back the budget plan.

Here’s what else is happening on Capitol Hill this week:

Tuesday, Sept. 24

Wednesday, Sept. 25

Thursday, Sept. 26

Signers of the document include a mix of Republicans and Democrats, including four former defense secretaries — William Cohen, Chuck Hagel, Leon Panetta, and William Perry — and seven Senate-confirmed military service secretaries.

“This election is a choice between serious leadership and vengeful impulsiveness,” the letter states. “It is a choice between democracy and authoritarianism. Vice President Harris defends America’s democratic ideals, while former President Donald Trump endangers them.”

The public message comes just a few days after Harris’ campaign released a similar public message from about 100 former Republican officials calling Trump “unfit to serve” and two weeks after a group of retired generals wrote a public statement defending Harris from Trump’s attacks regarding her involvement in the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Both campaigns have traded letters with military and national security themes throughout the summer.

GOP vets in Congress attack VP nominee Walz over his military record

Earlier this month, several families of servicemembers killed in Afghanistan offered their support for Trump. In August, a group of 50 veterans serving in Congress released a statement criticizing Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz for mischaracterizing his military service.

The latest letter also includes signatures from three former acting service secretaries, former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and former Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano.

The group criticized Trump’s incitement of supporters ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol and his past praise of foreign dictators as reasons to oppose his return to the White House. They also praised Harris’ work as vice president and her commitment to work with foreign allies to strengthen U.S. military capabilities.

“That is how we know Vice President Harris would make an excellent Commander In-Chief, while Mr. Trump has proven he is not up to the job,” the group wrote.

“As leaders, we know effective leadership requires in-depth knowledge, careful deliberation, understanding of your adversaries, and empathy for those you lead. It requires listening to those with expertise and not firing them when they disagree with you.”

The presidential election will be held on Nov. 5, but early voting has already opened in several states.

The move came just two days after House lawmakers advanced the same appropriations measure, which also mandates a report from department officials on the reasons behind the department’s budget shortfall within a month. The legislation is expected to be signed into law by President Joe Biden before the end of Friday.

Sept. 20 was the deadline given by VA leaders earlier this month for when they needed money approved by Congress to avoid benefits delays starting in October. On Wednesday, Under Secretary for Benefits Joshua Jacobs told members of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee that education support and monthly disability payouts could be delayed days or weeks without the emergency funds.

“The majority of the funds that we provide are delivered through direct deposit … and we’re working closely with the Treasury to find ways to compress that timeline,” he said.

Congress moves to fix VA budget gap, but time is running out

“The biggest risk is the 2% of veterans and survivors without that, 140,000 of the most vulnerable of our customers, many living in rural areas with more health conditions, who would have a delay of up to two weeks [for paper checks].”

Jacobs and other VA leaders said the budget shortfall came as a result of record-high benefits approvals and medical services usage by veterans in the last fiscal year, much of it due to the PACT Act. That legislation, passed in August 2022, dramatically expanded eligibility for those services to veterans who suffered toxic exposure injuries while in the service.

Under that legislation, administration officials had up to 10 years to implement all of the new benefits and support. But the White House opted to accelerate that timeline earlier this year, which officials said led to the higher, unexpected budget pressures.

Through the first 10 months of fiscal 2024, VA staff granted disability compensation benefits to more than 1.1 million veterans and survivors, a new record. Nearly 413,000 veterans newly enrolled in VA health care services over the previous 12 months, up 27% from the same time frame a year earlier.

Despite approving the $3 billion lifeline, numerous Republican lawmakers criticized the department for not recognizing the budget issues sooner, leading to a near emergency situation.

House lawmakers included the oversight report language to “hold the administration accountable for its budgeting errors,” according to Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. Bill sponsor Rep. Mike Garcia, R-Calif., said the measure “demands accountability with real oversight to make sure every dollar is spent right.”

Ahead of Thursday’s Senate vote, lawmakers blocked proposals from Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, to withhold bonuses for senior VA executives in cases of budgeting issues and from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., to rescind $2.9 billion from the Department of Energy to pay for the VA funding patch.

But Democrats in the House and Senate have downplayed the budgeting problem, saying that while the specifics were not known until recently, the extra expense from increased participation of veterans in department services was not a surprise.

“This is not the time for partisan politics,” Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Jon Tester, D-Mont., said during Wednesday’s hearing. “It is time to act to ensure that 7 million veterans and their families who are wondering whether they’ll receive their benefit checks in the next 13 days get them.”

VA officials have also asked for an additional $15 billion in the fiscal 2025 budget to cover increased benefits and medical care costs. Lawmakers are expected to debate that request after the November elections.

Officials from Disabled American Veterans and the Military Officers Association of America called the current toxic exposure system “flawed” and said their findings point to a critical need to overhaul how federal agencies identify, research and respond to the hazardous conditions faced by troops, for both vets already separated and those currently serving.

“Scientific, policy, political and fiscal challenges have too often delayed the establishment of [disability] presumptives, effectively denying justice for some veterans, their families and survivors,” report authors wrote.

“While there have been some significant leaps forward, such as the enactment of the Agent Orange Act of 1991 and the PACT Act of 2022, significant obstacles have left — and will continue to leave — too many toxic-exposed veterans waiting for the health care and benefits they have earned.”

VA eyes more medical care for vets with toxic exposure issues

The study lists 16 military toxic exposure events eventually recognized with presumptive benefits status for veterans. That status is key, because it recognizes all veterans who served in a certain area or certain time frame to skip complicated documentation of their illnesses, and instead concedes that their medical issues were likely caused by military service.

The list includes problems like exposure to the chemical defoliant Agent Orange during the Vietnam War, toxic burn pit smoke during the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, poisoned water at Camp Lejeune in from the 1950s to 1980s, and radioactive materials at various sites throughout the Cold War.

In some cases, the link between the toxins and veterans health problems was known within a few years, researchers found. But getting benefits fully sorted out took much longer.

“A veteran who served in Vietnam in 1962 and later developed hypertension had to wait 60 years from first exposure for the government to concede presumptive service connection,” the report stated. “Toxic-exposed veterans are waiting too long for the establishment of presumptives to ease their path to the benefits and health care they have earned.”

The groups are advocating for a clearer process of identifying military toxins, researching their effects and implementing care and benefits for veterans exposed to the chemicals.

“We’re already getting more accurate information about service members and their specific exposures,” said Cory Titus, MOAA’s director of government relations for veteran benefits. “Codifying some of those best practices that we are seeing will help ensure that we have a true system to take care of veterans into the future.”

Advocates briefed VA leaders and members of Congress on their findings ahead of Wednesday’s report release. Peter Dickinson, senior executive advisor for DAV, said advocates hope to turn the report into legislation early next year.

“[The current White House] has run very hard and fast on part of this issue under their control,” he said. “But there is a historical waxing and waning of attention focused on veterans. We need to set up a system where … we acknowledge problems early on, rather than saying we’re not going to acknowledge it until we’re ready to pay the bill.”

The proposed reforms include a clear framework with specific timelines for when VA officials must publicly acknowledge environmental hazard incidents, inform veterans about possible health impacts and begin the process of establishing presumptive rules surrounding those conditions.

Report authors also noted that “expanding scientific understanding of toxic exposures and environmental hazards is essential to support the VA’s efforts to provide timely, comprehensive benefits and health care to exposed veterans.”

The full report is available on the DAV and MOAA websites.