PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 27, 2022
This act modifies communications and procedures for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) regarding claims for compensation based on military sexual trauma (MST) experienced by veterans.
The act requires the VA to ensure each member of the BVA is offered annual training on MST and proceedings that concern a claim for compensation based on MST. A proceeding that concerns a claim for compensation based on MST may not be assigned to a member of the BVA (or a panel of members) unless such persons have completed the annual training.
When a notice of disagreement is filed, the BVA must promptly determine whether it is filed for a case that concerns a claim for compensation based on MST and for which the appellant has requested a hearing in the notice.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The VA must audit the language used in letters sent to individuals to explain decisions denying claims for compensation based on MST. Letters must be modified to ensure (1) the use of trauma-informed language, and (2) veterans are not retraumatized through insensitive language.
The VA must establish protocols for VA medical providers and contract medical providers to ensure that the medical providers use trauma-informed practices in conducting examinations in relation to claims for compensation based on MST.
People & committees
Rep. Mrvan, Frank J. [D-IN-1] · D–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 117-300.
Became Public Law No: 117-300.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7302-7303)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 12 (Roll no. 216). (text: CR H5107)
House roll call 216 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 12 (Roll no. 216).
House roll call 216 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5142)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6961.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5107-5108)
Mr. Takano moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Discharged.
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.6961 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.6961 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.6961 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.6961 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.