PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 23, 2016
Support Our Military Caregivers Act
(Sec. 2) This bill permits an individual to elect to have an independent contractor perform an external clinical review of any of the following:
a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denial of an individual's application to be a caregiver or family caregiver eligible for VA benefits;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
with respect to an approved application, a VA determination of the level or amount of personal care services that a veteran requires;
a request by a caregiver or family caregiver for a reconsideration of the level or amount of personal care services that a veteran requires based on post-application changes; and
a revocation of benefits by the VA.
The VA shall ensure that each external clinical review is completed and the individual is notified in writing of the results within 120 days of the election.
(Sec. 3) The VA shall issue policy, procedural, and operational directives for the program of comprehensive assistance for family caregivers and the program of general caregiver support services, including with respect to eligibility. The Government Accountability Office must report on VA processes for making and adjudicating eligibility determinations.
(Sec. 4) The bill amends the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 to revise the limits on the aggregate amount of awards and bonuses payable to VA employees in each of FY2017-FY2021.
People & committees
Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2914-2915)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2914-2915)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3989.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2914-2916)
Mr. Miller (FL) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.3989 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.
Examine H.R.3989 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.
Examine H.R.3989 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.
Examine H.R.3989 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.