[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 97 (Wednesday, July 17, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6951-S6952]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska):
  S. 2741. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve 
procedures for the determination of the inability of veterans to defray 
expenses of necessary medical care, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
address a problem in the way the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, 
determines a veteran's eligibility category for health care, which 
results in an unfair misclassification of many veterans who are 
farmers. Veterans who do not have a service-connected disability but 
who are unable to defray the cost of necessary health care are placed 
in priority group 5 and are able to receive health care services from 
the VA at no cost to the veteran. In order to determine whether a 
veteran falls below the means test threshold and is thus eligible to 
enroll in priority group 5, the VA looks at the net worth of a 
veteran's estate, including any real property owned by the veteran or 
the veteran's spouse. When you add in the value of farm land, the net 
worth of many farmer-veterans can appear high on paper even though they 
may in fact have little or no income.
  The current means test threshold for net worth is set at $80,000. 
Given the current average value of farm land in Iowa of $1,857, a farm 
in Iowa worth $80,000 would average a barely viable 44 acres. A more 
viable 80 acre farm would be worth $148,560 on average. In other words, 
almost any Iowa farm large enough to be viable would exceed the current 
means test threshold.
  Under the current law, when the value of a veteran's estate exceeds 
the means test threshold, the veteran becomes ineligible to enroll in 
priority group 5 if the VA determines that ``it is reasonable that some 
part of the corpus of such estates be consumed for the veteran's 
maintenance.'' I don't think it is ever ``reasonable'' that a veteran, 
who has little or no income or other assets, be asked to sell a portion 
of his family farm in order to pay his medical bills. Nevertheless, 
because of the way the law currently reads, these land-rich but cash-
poor veterans are often placed in priority group 7, meaning they may 
only enroll in VA health care if they agree to pay co-payments to the 
VA and then only on a space-available and funds-available basis.
  This problem was first brought to my attention by one of my 
constituents, Larry Sundall, who is a county veterans service officer 
in Emmet County, IA. In response, I convened a meeting in Des Moines in 
April of 2000, which was attended by county veterans service officers 
and State veterans affairs officers from Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and 
South Dakota as well as VA staff. I heard many similar stories about 
low-income veterans who were in the same boat. In September of that 
year, I introduced legislation to fix this problem by excluding the 
value of real property from the calculation of

[[Page S6952]]

the net worth of a veteran's estate in determining a veteran's 
eligibility category for health care.
  Unfortunately, my bill was not acted on before the end of the 106th 
Congress. In the first session of the 107th Congress, an unsuccessful 
attempt was made to address this issue in the context of legislation to 
make improvements to various veterans' programs. I am now reintroducing 
my legislation in hopes of fixing this problem once and for all.
  In addition, my bill makes some adjustments to the way the VA 
determines the attributable income of a veteran that will make the 
process easier for both the VA and the veteran. The VA currently has 
the authority to verify a veteran's income using a quick and efficient 
computer process that matches VA records with data from the IRS and 
other Federal agencies. However, the data for the prior year is often 
unavailable making it impossible for the VA to perform this income 
verification for the majority of veterans at the time when the data is 
needed. My bill would allow the VA to use the data available for the 
year preceding the previous year to determine the attributable income 
of a veteran. This would not only help the VA to more easily and more 
accurately determine a veteran's income, it would also allow a veteran 
to check a box to let the VA use this procedure to gather the veteran's 
income data without the veteran having to dig through his financial 
records and fill out the information on a form. It can be frustrating 
for a veteran to have to fill out the paperwork necessary to apply for 
benefits and this change would make the application process easier for 
both the veteran and the VA.
  My bill would correct a fundamental unfairness that adversely affects 
veterans who are farmers while making the application process for 
health benefits simpler for veterans and more efficient for the VA. In 
fact, taken together, these important reforms would actually save 
taxpayer dollars. According to data provided to me by the VA, over $8.7 
million would be saved in fiscal year 2003 alone. This legislation is a 
win-win proposition and I would urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting the swift passage of this measure.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2741

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. IMPROVEMENT OF PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINATION OF 
                   INABILITY TO DEFRAY EXPENSES OF NECESSARY 
                   MEDICAL CARE.

       (a) Exclusion of Certain Assets From Attributable Income 
     and Corpus of Estates.--Subsection (f) of section 1722 of 
     title 38, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting before the period at the 
     end the following: ``, except that such income shall not 
     include the value of any real property of the veteran or the 
     veteran's spouse or dependent children, if any, or any income 
     of the veteran's dependent children, if any''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the estates'' and all 
     that follows and inserting ``the estate of the veteran's 
     spouse, if any, but does not include any real property of the 
     veteran, the veteran's spouse, or any dependent children of 
     the veteran, nor any income of dependent children of the 
     veteran.''.
       (b) Alternative Year for Determination of Attributable 
     Income.--That section is further amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(h) For purposes of determining the attributable income 
     of a veteran under this section, the Secretary may determine 
     the attributable income of the veteran for the year preceding 
     the previous year, rather than for the previous year, if the 
     Secretary finds that available data do not permit a timely 
     determination of the attributable income of the veteran for 
     the previous year for such purposes.''.
       (c) Use of Income Information From Certain Other Federal 
     Agencies.--Section 5317 of that title is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
     (g) and (h), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new 
     subsection (f):
       ``(f) In addition to any other activities under this 
     section, the Secretary may utilize income information 
     obtained under this section from the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services or the Secretary of the Treasury for the 
     purpose of determining the attributable income of a veteran 
     under section 1722 of this title, in lieu of obtaining income 
     information directly from the veteran for that purpose.''.
       (d) Permanent Authority To Obtain Information.--(1) Section 
     5317 of that title, as amended by subsection (c), is further 
     amended by striking subsection (h).
       (2) Section 6103(l)(7)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (26 U.S.C. 6103(l)(7)(D)) is amended in the flush matter 
     at the end by striking the second sentence.
                                 ______