PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 118-19.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 6, 2023
This act extends the eligibility or applicability of various Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) programs and benefits.
First, the act extends from three to five years the authority for additional licensed health care professionals (i.e., physician assistants, nurse practitioners, audiologists, and psychologists) to perform medical disability examinations as part of the existing VA pilot program related to the use of contract physicians for disability examinations.
Currently, when an individual transfers fewer than 12 credits from a program of education that is closed or disapproved, the individual is deemed to have not received those credits, and no charge from the individual's entitlement to education assistance may be made for that period of enrollment. Under the act, this period of relief for those affected by a closure or disapproval is extended by two years to apply to programs that close or discontinue before September 30, 2025.
The act extends through FY2028 the authorization for VA emergency preparedness for public health emergencies.
The act also extends the applicability of certain loan fee rates through November 15, 2031, under the VA's home loan program.
People & committees
Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT] · D–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 118-19.
Became Public Law No: 118-19.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4475)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4475)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 2795.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4475-4480)
Mr. Bost moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S4499; text: CR S4499)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S4499; text: CR S4499)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Oct 31, 2024. 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.2795 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.2795 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.2795 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.2795 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.