PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Mar 25, 1994
Court of Veterans Appeals Improvement Act of 1994 - Requires the chief judge of the Court of Veterans Appeals to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Provides that a notice of appeal to the Court of an adverse decision of the Board of Veterans Appeals shall be considered timely if postmarked or received by the Court within 120 days after the decision of the Board is mailed to the appellant. Revises the manner of the payment of attorney's fees paid by the Secretary from the awarding of past-due benefits under contingent fee arrangements.
People & committees
Sen. Rockefeller, John D., IV [D-WV] · D–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
See H.R.5244.
Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S3936-3937)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S3936-3937)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 376.
Committee on Veterans. Reported to Senate by Senator Rockefeller with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 103-232.
Committee on Veterans. Reported to Senate by Senator Rockefeller with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 103-232.
Committee on Veterans. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S13493-13495)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 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 S.1546 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 S.1546 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 S.1546 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 S.1546 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.