S-3703-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Sponsored by Jon Husted (R-OH)
What it does
This bill would expand the pool of contract health care professionals eligible to perform medical disability examinations for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) by broadening the licensing requirement — from a specific list of professions to any licensed health care professional eligible for a VA appointment who holds a current, unrestricted license and is not barred from practice in any state. It would also extend the sunset date for this temporary authority from five years after the 2020 law's enactment to September 30, 2031. Finally, it would require the VA Secretary to submit a report to Congress within 15 months detailing how the authority has been used, including exam counts, costs, timeliness, and any errors.
Who benefits
Veterans in rural and underserved areas who currently face long wait times or travel distances for VA disability examinations, as a broader pool of eligible contractors could increase local availability. Veterans broadly who may see faster processing of disability claims. Contract health care professionals (beyond the previously listed specialties of physician assistants, nurse practitioners, audiologists, and psychologists) who would now be eligible to perform these exams. VA contractors and staffing firms that supply health care professionals to the VA. Veterans with disabilities whose claims are delayed due to examiner shortages.
Who is hurt
State medical licensing boards, which may have less leverage over out-of-state practitioners performing VA exams under the broadened framework. Health care professionals in the previously enumerated specialties who may face increased competition for VA contracts. Veterans' advocacy groups concerned about quality control if examiner qualifications are diluted. Taxpayers if expanded contractor use increases overall program costs. VA employees who perform disability exams in-house and may face reduced demand for their services.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that rural veterans face a documented access crisis — VA data has shown that veterans in rural areas wait significantly longer for disability examinations than their urban counterparts, delaying compensation for service-connected conditions. They contend that the prior law's narrow list of eligible professions artificially constrained the contractor pool, and that expanding eligibility to any qualified, licensed, non-barred VA-eligible professional maintains patient safety while meaningfully increasing access. The mandatory reporting requirement, they argue, ensures congressional oversight and accountability for how the expanded authority is used.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that broadening the eligible contractor pool beyond specifically enumerated specialties could reduce the consistency and quality of disability examinations that directly determine veterans' benefit levels. They contend that the original list of professions — physician assistants, nurse practitioners, audiologists, and psychologists — reflected deliberate judgments about which specialties are appropriate for disability assessments, and that removing those guardrails may expose veterans to examiners lacking relevant expertise. Critics may also note that extending the sunset to 2031 without a permanent fix or more rigorous quality standards simply delays a more comprehensive solution to rural access problems.