PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 8, 2022
This bill expands eligibility for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reimbursement of emergency treatment for veterans who are treated in a non-VA facility. Specifically, the bill waives the requirement that a veteran must have received VA care within the 24-month period preceding the furnishing of emergency treatment if the veteran receives such emergency treatment within the 60-day period following their enrollment in the VA health care system.
People & committees
Rep. McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [R-WA-5] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Health Discharged.
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.6647 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.6647 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.6647 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.6647 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.