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 23, 2025
Women Involuntarily Separated Earning Remittance Act of 2025 or the WISER Act of 2025
This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) to establish and implement certain programs to address the involuntary separation of women veterans who served during the period of April 27, 1951, through February 23, 1976, under Executive Order 10240. Such order provided for the involuntary separation of women from service for (1) being a parent via birth or adoption, (2) gaining custody of a child, (3) being a step-parent who lived with the child more than 30 days per year, (4) being pregnant, or (5) giving birth to a living child while serving.
The VA must establish and implement a program to upgrade the discharge status of such women veterans, and DOD must establish and implement a program to provide them with a one-time compensation of $25,000. Veterans must apply to participate in such programs.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
For benefits purposes, the VA must treat veterans who receive a discharge status upgrade as if the veteran completed the duty to which the veteran was assigned at the time they were discharged from service.
If a veteran dies after the enactment of this bill, a surviving spouse is eligible to participate in the DOD compensation program.
The bill provides a rebuttable presumption of eligibility for the programs for a veteran who gave birth, obtained custody, adopted a child, or experienced an incomplete pregnancy during the 10-month period after the veteran was separated from service.
People & committees
Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26] · D–CA
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 Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Aug 23, 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.660 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.660 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.660 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.660 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.