PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 22, 2015
Establishes an Appeals Task Force to evaluate the backlog of appeals of claims within the Board of Veterans' Appeals and the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).
Requires the Task Force to study: (1) the anticipated surge in appeals of claims; and (2) possible improvements to the appeals process, including whether substantive and structural changes to the overall appeals process are required.
Directs the Task Force to submit to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals, and the Court a feasible, timely, and cost effective plan to eliminate the backlog of appeals based on the remedies and solutions it identifies. Requires the Secretary, Chairman, and Court to: (1) fully consider those remedies and solutions, (2) implement those the Secretary deems appropriate, and (3) submit to Congress justification for failing to implement any such remedy or solution.
People & committees
Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs.
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.517 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.517 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.517 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.517 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.