PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3212 / 105th Congress

Court of Veterans Appeals Act of 1998

See H.R.4110.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 1998

TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Administrative Provisions Relating to the Court Title II: Staggered Retirement and Recall Provisions Title III: Renaming of Court Court of Veterans Appeals Act of 1988 - Title I: Administrative Provisions Relating to the Court - Authorizes the Court of Veterans Appeals (Court) to prescribe rules and regulations. Requires six months or more served as a Court judge to be credited toward years of service and less than six months to not be credited. Allows for a cost-of-living adjustment to the retired pay of a Court judge only up to an amount that would make such retired pay equal to the pay received by a current Court judge. Allows a Court judge to elect to participate in a survivor annuity within six months after marriage if such judge has retired. Reduces the percentage of pay reduction required of active judges as contributions toward retirement annuities. Prohibits interest payments on retirement pay deductions in the case of Court judges for any period during which such judges: (1) were separated from judicial service or service as a Member of Congress or congressional employee; and (2) were not receiving retired pay or annuities based on such service. Allows a survivor annuity to be paid to the survivors of a judge who dies after having rendered at least 18 months (currently five years) of creditable civilian service. Allows a survivor annuity without a creditable service requirement in the case of a judge who dies of an assassination. Repeals a current requirement that a surviving spouse be at least 50 years of age before receiving such annuity. Increases such annuities at the same time and by the same percentage by which annuities payable from the Judicial Survivors' Annuity Fund are increased. Exempts the Court of Veterans Appeals Retirement Fund from sequestration under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act). Provides a forfeiture of retired pay rights and benefits in the case of any Court judge who, after retirement, represents a client in a claim relating to veterans' benefits. Title II: Staggered Retirement and Recall Provisions - Allows only one individual each year to retire as a Court judge in the years 1999 through 2003. Provides retirement requirements, including age and years of service. Requires a judge to: (1) notify the President and the Court's chief judge of the intent to retire; and (2) retire during the fiscal year in which notification is provided but not earlier than 90 days after such notification is provided. Makes a retired Court judge eligible for recall upon providing the chief judge with written notification. Allows the chief judge to recall such a judge to meet the needs of the Court. Title III: Renaming of Court- Renames the Court as the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Stump, Bob [R-AZ-3] · R–AZ

Committees

  • Veterans' Affairs Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. See H.R.4110.

  2. Subcommittee Hearings Held.

  3. Referred to the Subcommittee on Benefits.

  4. Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

  5. Introduced in House

  6. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.3212 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.3212 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.3212 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.3212 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources