POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript

Congressional Hearing on VA Medical Facility Construction and Health Legislation

Original title: LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON: H.R. 272; H.R. 353; H.R. 359; H.R. 421; H.R. 423; H.R. 1356; H.R. 1688; H.R. 1862; H.R. 2464; H.R. 2914; H.R. 2915; H.R. 3016; AND, DRAFT LEGISLATION TO AUTHORIZE VA MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS FOR FY 2015 AND TO MAKE CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF VA MEDICAL FACILITY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

January 1, 2016

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

This hearing serves as the legislative review process for proposed laws that would authorize new VA construction projects for fiscal year 2015 and change how the VA manages and oversees its medical facility building programs.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Veterans

Veterans are the primary users of the medical facilities being discussed for construction and administrative reform.

Department of Veterans Affairs

The agency is responsible for implementing the construction projects and administrative changes proposed in the legislation.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2016.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

The House Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on July 14, 2015, to review 12 separate bills and draft legislation concerning Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical facility construction projects and administrative improvements. The session included testimony from members of Congress, veterans' advocacy groups, and VA officials.

Key Facts

  • The hearing reviewed 12 specific House bills (H.R. 272, 353, 359, 421, 423, 1356, 1688, 1862, 2464, 2914, 2915, 3016).
  • The committee reviewed draft legislation to authorize VA major medical facility construction projects for fiscal year 2015.
  • The committee reviewed proposals to improve the administration and management of VA medical facility construction projects.
  • Testimony was provided by multiple members of Congress representing various districts.
  • Representatives from the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, and Veterans of Foreign Wars provided formal testimony.
  • Officials from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) provided testimony regarding policy and operations.

Why It Matters

This hearing serves as the legislative review process for proposed laws that would authorize new VA construction projects for fiscal year 2015 and change how the VA manages and oversees its medical facility building programs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
To discuss and review proposed legislation regarding VA medical facility construction projects and administrative improvements for fiscal year 2015.
Who testified at the hearing?
Members of Congress, representatives from veterans' service organizations like the American Legion and VFW, and officials from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift80% confidence

Focus on Construction Management

The hearing highlights a specific legislative focus on improving the administration of VA construction projects, likely in response to previous project delays or cost overruns.

Connected Entities

personJulia BrownleyRanking Member of the Subcommittee on HealthMap →
organizationAmerican LegionVeterans advocacy group providing testimonyMap →
organizationVeterans of Foreign WarsVeterans advocacy group providing testimonyMap →
personDan BenishekChairman of the Subcommittee on HealthMap →
organizationU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsSubject of the legislative oversightMap →
organizationDisabled American VeteransVeterans advocacy group providing testimonyMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance65
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy20
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz10
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record