The bill, which also provides appropriations for veterans-related agencies such as the American Battle Monuments Commission and Arlington National Cemetery, includes nearly $450 billion for the VA in fiscal 2027, a 3% increase from fiscal 2026 but lower than President Donald Trump’s request of $488 billion.

The bill was the first appropriations legislation to clear the House this year, in a 400-15 vote May 15 that Rep. John Carter, R-Tex., called a “testament to America’s commitment to taking care of the men and women who have bravely worn the uniform.”

“I want every service member and veteran to know that this bill has their back,” said Carter, chairman of the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

The bill includes $324 billion in mandatory spending for the VA that covers health care and benefits and $137.8 billion for discretionary spending, roughly 2% higher than the fiscal 2026 amount but significantly lower than Trump’s request of $205.6 billion for discretionary funds.

The White House had asked to shift mandatory funds marked for injuries or illnesses related to toxic exposures — roughly $52 billion — to the discretionary budget, but the committee rejected the idea.

Lawmakers have expressed concerns that the use of those mandatory dollars, from the Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund, would jeopardize the fund’s intended use for veterans sickened by environmental pollutants.

The bill provides $19.7 billion for military construction projects, including $2.1 billion for the Army; $5.5 billion for the Navy and Marine Corps; $3.7 billion for the Air Force; $3.8 billion Defense Department-wide and additional funding for the National Guard and Reserve components.

The bill also includes a provision that would cement the VA’s decision to halt notifications to the Justice Department of a veteran’s inability to manage his or her finances — a situation that precluded veterans with fiduciaries from owning guns.

The Senate still must craft its own version of the bill, referred to as the MilConVA bill. The subcommittee responsible for the legislation jump-started that process in separate hearings April 30 and May 14 on the president’s budget proposals.

During those hearings, senators appeared supportive of the VA budget request and sought affirmation from VA officials that the department use the funds judiciously for health care, claims processing and other veterans services.

Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., ranking member of the Senate Appropriations MilConVA subcommittee, called the budget proposals “important investments” in the department.

But he expressed concerns about whether the VA had sufficient numbers of physicians and nurses and noted that the budget calls for significant increases for care at private facilities covered by the VA and less of an increase for health care at VA hospitals and clinics.

“The department’s own public facing data shows that outcome for veterans are either the same or better for direct VA care compared to privatized outside care,” Ossoff told VA Secretary Doug Collins in the April 30 hearing.

Collins testified Thursday before the House MilCon Appropriations Subcommittee, six days after the House passed its proposed bill.

Collins said that conflicts and the approval process prevented him from testifying until May 21, although earlier in the deliberation process, House Democrats had successfully amended the legislation to withhold 25% of the secretary’s office budget until he testified.

“Our veterans do not deserve that kind of uncertainty and lack of transparency,” said the subcommittee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida.

Collins praised the committee for the legislation’s passage and called changes at the VA since he has taken office a “tale of two cities.” He said in the past year the VA has announced a restructuring, instituted a manning document, reduced its disability claims backlog, restarted its VA electronic health records system program and reduced appointment wait times.

“The VA will never be perfect and neither will its budget, but we are always going to work together to make sure one thing is true: Veterans are always going to come first at the VA,” Collins said.

The Senate is expected to roll out its MilConVA appropriations bill this summer.

For the second year , no VA hospitals received a one-star rating from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, the agency within the Department of Health and Human Services that publishes quality assessments for U.S. hospitals based on mortality rates, patient safety, hospital readmissions and other measures.

CMS began rating VA hospitals in 2023. That year, of 114 facilities that were evaluated, nearly 30% received five stars; 37% received four stars; 15% were awarded three stars; 11%, two stars; and 8% — or nine facilities — one star.

In 2026, 45% of VA facilities received five stars, 33% earned four stars, 16% received three stars and 6% were given two stars.

Since the first assessment, the percentage of VA facilities that have earned four or five stars rose from 67% to 78%, despite dipping to 58% in 2024.

The assessments compare favorably against more than 4,600 hospitals reviewed by CMS nationwide. Roughly 12% of U.S. hospitals received five-star ratings, 30% were awarded four stars, 31% received three stars, 21% earned two stars and 6% were given one star this year.

Officials said the new ratings mean VA hospitals account for nearly 15% of the country’s five-star rated hospitals.

“The Trump Administration has a proven track record of improving Veterans’ care, and these ratings underscore that success,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said in a release. “We look forward to continuing to deliver the results veterans have earned at VA facilities across the nation.”

The list of high- and low- performing facilities at the VA has fluctuated over time, with some marked improvements in facilities that received one star in 2023.

For example, the VA Pittsburgh Health Care System, Providence VA Medical Center in Rhode Island and the Bronx VA Medical Center in New York City each received one star in 2023 but earned four stars in 2026.

Two facilities that earned one star each in 2023 continue to be among the VA’s list of facilities performing under national averages on several measures. The Overton Brooks VA Medical Center in Shreveport, Louisiana, and the San Juan Medical Center, Puerto Rico, are among the seven VA facilities that received two stars.

The VA maintained its own internal star ratings and began publishing them in 2017 following a series of news reports. In late 2019, the department dropped the effort because VA leaders said it provided little value to veterans.

Twenty Veterans Health Administration medical centers were not rated because they did not meet the criteria for inclusion. CMS does not rate facilities that have a low number of cases or incidents that are specific to its assessment criteria.

It also does not rate specialty hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers and some inpatient care facilities, such as psychiatric hospitals.

The CMS star ratings can be found on Medicare’s Care Compare website.

According to budget documents released this week by the Trump administration, the VA would receive a record $488 billion, including $205.6 billion in discretionary funding for programs and operations and $282.6 billion for mandatory spending — the column that covers disability benefits, pensions, insurance and other requirements.

Highlights in the discretionary spending proposal include $500 million to build permanent facilities for homeless veterans at the new National Center for Warrior Independence in West Los Angeles, $1.3 billion to construct a VA medical center in Manchester, New Hampshire, nearly $2 billion to replace the VA medical center in Indianapolis and $30 million to buy land for a new medical center in San Antonio.

The budget supports the VA’s proposed redesign of its community care contracts and programs and planned changes to the management structure at the Veterans Health Administration. It also funds the restart of the VA’s electronic medical record system program that has been on hold since 2022. The VA plans to restart the initiative this month at four facilities, with an additional nine joining later this year.

The VA estimates that the fiscal 2027 budget would provide disability compensation to more than 7.4 million veterans and support 9.2 million veterans enrolled in VA health care.

According to the VA’s Budget in Brief documents, the proposal would support 443,327 full-time VA employees — roughly 9,000 fewer than in 2025 but up nearly 6,200 from fiscal 2026.

In a statement laid out in the documents, VA Secretary Doug Collins said the proposal will enable the department to deliver timely care and benefits for all beneficiaries.

“This budget request reflects VA’s efforts to find more effective and efficient ways to serve our mission and maximize our resources,” the document states. “The days of measuring VA’s progress by how much money we spend and how many people we employ, instead of how successfully we serve Veterans, are over.”

President Donald Trump’s $2.2 trillion budget proposal for fiscal 2027 includes nearly $1.5 trillion in spending for the Defense Department — up 44% from fiscal 2026 levels — and increases for the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.

It trims several domestic programs, including education, food and energy assistance, housing, the National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, among others.

The proposed VA budget increases spending for VA medical care provided in VA facilities but also increases the budget for community care, the VA’s program for covering the health treatment received by veterans in non-VA facilities.

The budget, which also includes a request for advanced funding for fiscal 2028, ensures that veterans benefits and services are never affected by a government shutdown. In addition, it increases medical care funding, with $96.2 billion requested for care provided in the VA medical system and $42 billion for community care.

As with fiscal 2026, VA officials asked to shift the mandatory funds designated to cover the costs associated with injuries or illnesses related to toxic exposures to the discretionary budget. The request of $52 billion from the Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund is likely to raise concerns among Democratic lawmakers, who have argued that the continued use of the funds could jeopardize monies set aside for a specific purpose.

The proposal also seeks to cut what White House officials referred to as “divisive and wasteful diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.” The budget documents did not specify which diversity programs the budget will defund, but officials said the reductions would ensure that “VA funding is used for critical VA missions: providing healthcare; benefits; and cemetery services for America’s veterans.”

The president’s proposed budget represents Trump’s vision for the federal government. It serves as a blueprint for Congress to consider as it starts its fiscal 2027 appropriations process.

In the last 25 years, the VA’s budget has ballooned significantly to address the needs of older veterans as well as the millions who served in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget proposal represents a 10-fold increase for the VA since fiscal 2001, when the VA’s budget was $45 billion.

John Windom, who served as a program manager on the Defense Department’s adoption of the Cerner electronic health records platform before moving to the VA to manage its health records modernization program, was indicted for allegedly failing to report more than $16,000 worth of gifts.

According to a grand jury indictment filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., Windom allegedly accepted cash and other items from at least seven people and companies supporting the VA’s Cerner Oracle health records contract. He met them regularly at a Maryland casino resort to mentor as part of a self-developed mentorship program on building government contracting businesses, the indictment said.

Court records say Windom allegedly accepted an $8,200 Louis Vuitton gift card, $2,000 in cash, $1,800 worth of casino chips, a $1,000 gift card, $2,000 in cash or casino chips and a $631 high-efficiency particulate air filter.

“As alleged, the defendant exploited his senior position for personal gain and concealed gifts and financial relationships that created serious conflicts of interest in the health care of our nation’s veterans,” U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Jeanine Pirro said in a statement Wednesday.

“Such conduct is not only a betrayal of the public trust—it undermines confidence in the institutions dedicated to serving those who have sacrificed for this country,” Pirro added.

The VA’s health records modernization program began in 2017 under President Donald Trump’s first term, a sole-source $10 billion contract that followed the DOD’s award to Cerner for a new electronic medical records system.

The project was originally scheduled to take 10 years and cost $16 billion. But nearly nine years later, just six of the VA’s 170-plus medical sites use the program, which was paused in April 2023 following issues regarding safety and usability.

The VA plans to resume adoption this year, announcing last March that it would roll it out to 13 additional sites.

Windom served as executive director of the Office of Electronic Health Record Modernization from 2017 to 2022. In 2022, he was reassigned to the position of deputy director of the Federal Electronic Health Management Office. He is a retired Navy captain with acquisition experience.

He allegedly accepted the gifts between June 2020 and November 2020, according to the indictment.

According to the indictment, Windom allegedly concealed from his leadership and ethics officials that he was “accepting, and sometimes demanding, extravagant gifts” from contractors and subcontractors working on the electronic health records system project.

Windom is charged with concealment of material facts, false statements and falsification of a record or document in relation to his failure to report his receipt of gifts, which he was legally obligated to do.

If found guilty of all charges, he faces more than 20 years in prison, as well as financial penalties.

The Justice Department noted that Windom is presumed innocent until he is proven guilty by the court.

A message left with Windom from Military Times was not answered by publication.

Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., kicked off a series of hearings Wednesday on legislation that would reauthorize several significant VA programs and said he wants to create a comprehensive authorization process — an omnibus-style procedure — that would ensure a yearly legislative review of all VA programs, some of which have not been reauthorized for 30 years.

Bost said such oversight is needed to ensure that the VA remains accountable to its customers, taxpayers and Congress.

“When programs fall short, it is the duty of this committee to ask questions, demand answers and make the legislative changes necessary to fix the problem,” Bost said. “Reauthorization is not simply a procedural exercise. It is how Congress evaluates whether programs are working as intended and whether the department is using its authorities responsibly.”

Last year, the Congressional Budget Office identified more than $122 billion in expenditures at the department with lapsed authorizations. According to the office, Congress has allowed 18 authorization laws — those that set policy and recommend funding levels — for the VA to expire.

Bost said the committee needs to tackle reauthorization to ensure that Congress has “the means to modernize [the] VA.”

“[These bills] are designed to restore accountability, improve transparency and ensure that VA remains focused on veterans,” Bost said.

Since the start of the second Trump administration, members of Congress have complained that the VA has become significantly less responsive to congressional inquiries and oversight. During a hearing in January, Bost scolded VA officials for repeated delays in providing responses and testimony to Congress, saying he considered preventing the department from testifying given its lack of timeliness.

Likewise, at the same hearing, the committee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Mark Takano of California, said the delays showed “enormous disrespect.”

“It is inexcusable. This should never happen again,” Takano said. “Get your testimony here on time, especially when we’re reviewing $1 trillion [in spending].”

Bost has discussed creating a single authorization bill for the VA since last year, sharing his vision first with Politico Pro.

While none of the 27 bills considered Wednesday was a comprehensive authorization proposal, the collection featured several prioritized by House Republicans for review, including bills that address the VA’s restructuring of its health care system, evaluation of the VA’s national drug formulary and reforms of its leasing and construction and contracting and procurement process.

“The goal is simple: better coordination, stronger accountability and better outcomes for veterans,” Bost said.

For the NDAA, House and Senate Armed Services subcommittee members draft portions of the separate bills for their areas of interest, then vote and move their section along to the full committee for consideration. At each step, lawmakers can propose amendments, which are then voted on by committee and either rolled into the bill or rejected. Eventually, the bills are voted on by the respective chambers, and the versions are reconciled in conference before both are passed again. The final bill is then sent to the president’s desk for signing.

For the VA, the authorization process has been piecemeal, with lawmakers proposing policy bills as they see need. For example, other bills proposed Wednesday included legislation that would expand dental care to all veterans in the VA health system and create a Toxic Exposure Advisory Committee to support implementation of the PACT Act.

VA officials at the hearing said that while they “strongly support congressional oversight and engagement,” the department has concerns on comprehensive legislation, saying it “could cause serious disruption to VA benefits and services.”

“VA believes that a clear accounting of programs and services could be achieved through additional avenues such as additional requests for information, briefing request, additional oversight hearings or requiring additional justification materials,” said Phil Christy, the VA’s chief acquisition officer.

During the hearing, Takano said he wasn’t sure that the NDAA strategy would work but added that he is “certainly willing to try.”

“I welcome an effort by this chamber by our House and by this committee to reclaim its authorities and reaffirm our Article I powers by doing the real oversight the VA so desperately needs,” said Takano, referring to the portion of the Constitution that established Congress and gave it the powers to create laws, raise revenue and declare war.

Bost noted that committee oversight is a constitutional responsibility and VA must be accountable.

“It is a task … not an ask,” Bost said.

According to an advanced Federal Register notice, the rescission will be effective immediately on publication, expected early Friday morning.

In the notice, VA officials said that while the rule was meant to clarify existing policy, “stakeholders have expressed uncertainty” about its impact on claims and leaving the rule in place during the codification process “could undermine confidence in the benefits system.”

“VA always takes veterans’ concerns seriously and recognizes that many commenters construed the interim final rule as something that could result in adverse consequences,” the notice read.

The rule, published Feb. 17, generated significant backlash from veterans, advocacy groups and lawmakers who said the proposal could have financially penalized veterans who adhere to medical treatment or encourage those seeking a disability rating to forego medications prior to a compensation and pension exam, putting their health at risk.

The VA said the regulation simply formalized a practice that has been in place since 1958. Officials said it was needed because a 2025 court ruling, Ingram v. Collins, decided the VA must discount the positive impact of medication when issuing a disability rating.

The rule stated that the methodology dictated by the courts set a standard that was “unquantifiable, hypothetical [and] unwarranted.”

The major veterans groups, including Disabled American Veterans, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and American Legion strongly objected to ruling, which they said was crafted without any input from veterans outside the VA.

Nearly 20,000 veterans and advocates have flooded the Federal Register’s comment section on the rule, saying it would hurt veterans.

“As a former Army nurse, it seems this rule change could have unforeseen and harmful downstream effects for veterans, which is why it demands serious public scrutiny and possible legislative clarification from Capitol Hill,” VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore said in a statement shortly after the rule was published. “While VA has authority to amend the rating schedule, it must do so without adversely affecting veterans.”

Collins announced two days after publication that the rule would not be enforced. But it remained on the books, raising concerns among veterans.

At least one lawsuit was filed against the VA seeking to stop implementation and on Tuesday, 20 Democrat and independent lawmakers from the House and Senate wrote Collins asking the rule be revoked.

They said that leaving the rule on the books was causing veterans to “confront the unnecessary dilemma of continuing life-improving treatment for their conditions.”

“This rule forces veterans into an impossible choice: follow their prescribed treatment plan or risk losing their benefits,” wrote the lawmakers, including the ranking Democrats on the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees, Rep. Mark Takano of California and Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.

In letter, the lawmakers said enforcement of the rule could have resulted in an estimated $23 billion in savings and objected to what they said was a “political maneuver aimed at cutting costs.”

The VA has filed an appeal to the Ingram v. Collins ruling, and the rescission does not resolve that court case which continues.

In the notice to be published Friday, officials said the department is “committed to its mission of ensuring that every claimant applying for benefits — especially veterans who have earned disability compensation through their honorable service to the Nation — receives all benefits to which they are entitled under the law as expeditiously as possible.”

The justices denied petitions Monday for Poffenbarger v. Meink and Doster v. Meink — cases that had challenged the vaccine mandate but were dismissed by lower courts as moot, given that the DoD allowed service members who refused the vaccine to begin returning in 2023, and in 2025, announced incentives such as back pay to bring them back in.

In the first case, Air Force Reserve First Lt. Michael Poffenbarger filed his lawsuit in 2022, arguing that the order violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment. Poffenbarger had sought a religious exemption from the immunization and was denied, receiving a letter of reprimand and placed on the inactive list.

After a lower court dismissed his case as moot, given that the DoD had begun allowing service members to return to service, Poffenbarger appealed, seeking lost pay and retirement points. The appellate court affirmed the ruling and Poffenbarger petitioned the Supreme Court, where he was denied.

Second Lt. Hunter Doster filed suit with 17 other Air Force members, also in 2022, challenging the vaccine mandate for religious reasons. After the mandate was rescinded, they argued their case was still valid as they sought back pay and retirement points.

But in the Doster case, the lower court also noted that the plaintiffs did not request back pay in their original filing, with the appeals court affirming the ruling. The 18 plaintiffs then filed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which denied the case.

Roughly 17,000 service members refused the vaccine, and more than 8,400 were discharged for their decision, including 3,717 Marines, 2,041 Navy sailors, 1,841 Army soldiers and 834 Air Force and Space Force members.

From early 2023 through June 2025, 126 service members who had refused to receive the shot had returned to service.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, to bring back troops booted from the service for refusing the vaccine complete with “full back pay, benefits, bonus payments, or compensation.”

The Defense Department and military services developed policies in response to the executive order, providing back pay for service members but also requiring them to commit to additional terms of service and deduct the wages they received while working as civilians, including Veterans Affairs disability compensation or other benefits.

Through 2022, more than 2 million troops received two doses of the vaccine, which was developed under Trump through a federal partnership between the Departments of Health and Human Services and Defense.

Between March 2020 and December 2022, the Pentagon recorded 740,942 cases of COVID-19 among troops, family members, DoD employees and contractors and 690 deaths, including 96 service members.

Effective immediately, examiners will determine a veteran’s level of disability including the effects of medication or treatment — the “actual level of functional impairment under the ordinary conditions of daily life” — according to an interim final rule in the Federal Register.

Examiners are not allowed to estimate a veteran’s disability level if they were off their medications, and if a medication or treatment lowers the level of disability, the rating will be based on the lower level.

VA officials say the clarification is needed following several court rulings they said could be interpreted as allowing examiners to estimate or guess a veteran’s level of disability without medication.

“While VA believes this is already the correct construction of current regulations, this change will make more explicit in regulation VA’s longstanding policy and practice to include, among other factors, the ameliorative effects of medication when conducting disability evaluations,” officials wrote in the notice.

Basing a disability rating without considering the effect of medication or treatment is “an unquantifiable, hypothetical, unwarranted standard that would compensate veterans for a level of disability they are not actually experiencing,” they wrote.

The rule drew backlash from veterans groups including Disabled American Veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Unite for Veterans Coalition and others, who issued statements saying the rule could result in lower disability compensation for veterans whose health conditions are connected to military service.

The advocates noted that the rule was published as an “interim final rule” without input from veterans groups and questioned how it would affect those who already receive disability compensation.

“DAV is extremely disappointed and alarmed by VA’s decision to issue [the interim final rule],” National Commander Coleman Nee said in a statement. “It is unclear if and how VA is implementing this dramatic change.”

“As a former Army nurse, it seems this rule change could have unforeseen and harmful downstream effects for veterans, which is why it demands serious public scrutiny and possible legislative clarification from Capitol Hill,” VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore said. “While VA has authority to amend the rating schedule, it must do so without adversely affecting veterans.”

Retired Marine Corps Lt. Col. Joe Plenzler, spokesman for Unite for Veterans, said the rule could result in lower disability ratings. He noted that previously, the VA focused on a veteran’s “worst days,” not on how medications are working on the day of a disability exam.

“This rule is very broad and seriously risks underrating veterans who have disabilities medications can mask but do not fix,” Plenzler said in a statement.

The rule was published as an “interim final rule” to go into effect immediately — a move that also has alarmed veterans groups.

Under the normal rules process, federal agencies publish an interim rule and solicit comments from the public for a set time period, usually 60 days. The agency then uses the comments to craft the final rule, which goes into effect once it is published in the Federal Register.

For the new regulation, VA Secretary Doug Collins said the department will take public comment under consideration but would implement it immediately. Collins argued that by not being clear, the department runs the risk of increasing administrative costs, delaying claims decisions and distributing excess disability compensation based on levels that “veterans are not actually experiencing.”

“Issuing this interim final rule without delay is in the public interest because it will prevent a significant negative impact on veterans awaiting claim decisions from VA,” the rule stated.

DAV and Unite the Veterans both took issue with the VA’s assertions.

“The rule … was developed and issued in a closed and unnecessarily expedited process that effectively shut out veterans from providing any meaningful input,” Nee noted.

“The claim that quick action on this issue is required shows the degree to which the VA is putting its administrative needs ahead of veterans’ needs and the realities of their lives. This is the wrong emphasis,” Plenzler said.

Since it was published Tuesday morning, the regulation has drawn more than 650 comments, many from veterans who said medications for various conditions such as musculoskeletal injuries, mental health conditions and hypertension often don’t produce consistent results and aren’t curative, leaving veterans to still deal with their disabilities daily.

Aaron Haygood, a retired airman, said the rule ignores the physical side effects of medication that can be debilitating in their own right and the logistical burdens of following a strict treatment regimen.

But more important, Haygood added, it creates a “dangerous incentive not to seek treatment.”

“It creates a cruel choice where the veteran must decide between taking the medication for an improved quality of life knowing it could lead to a reduction in the benefits they may depend on or sacrifice their quality of life to ensure financial stability for their family,” Haygood wrote.

“This policy will discourage veterans from seeking life-saving treatments,” he added.

The VA announced Tuesday it will immediately stop reporting veterans to the FBI’s national background check database if they need a fiduciary to help manage their benefits.

Proponents of the decades-old policy have said it protects veterans with mental impairments by limiting access to a lethal means of suicide. But major veteran advocacy groups and gun rights organizations have long argued the notifications weren’t based on thorough mental assessments and actually prevented veterans from seeking help for fear of losing their 2nd Amendment rights.

Since 2017, Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation to force the VA to stop the practice, including as recently as last year, with H.R. 496, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Restoration Act of 2025, sponsored by Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz.

But on Tuesday VA officials said that based on a legal review, the agency and the Department of Justice have determined the VA can simply halt the notifications.

According to the VA, the law states that to report a person to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, a determination must be made by a judge or “quasi-judicial body.”

The VA and DOJ determined that the decision that a veteran needs a fiduciary “falls short of this legal standard,” and veterans were reported without a hearing or “adequate determinations that they posed a sufficient risk of danger to themselves and others.”

“Many Americans struggle with managing their finances, and Veterans’ Second Amendment rights shouldn’t be stripped just because they need help in this area. But for too long, Veterans who needed the services of a VA fiduciary were deprived of their right to bear arms,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said in a press release.

The Brady Act allows the Justice Department to collect information from federal agencies of anyone whose ownership or position of a firearm would violate federal law, including those who are a danger to themselves or others; who lack the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs; or have been found insane by a court or incompetent to stand trial.

In its review of the practice, the VA determined that it violated another law, the Gun Control Act, as well as the 2nd Amendment.

The VA halted the practice for six months in 2024 under legislation approved by Congress in a consolidated appropriations law, but it only applied to veterans who entered the fiduciary program from that year and was not retroactive.

The new change will affect veterans who have lost their access to a firearm as a result of needing a fiduciary and being reported to the database, which is used by dealers to perform background checks and determine who is eligible to own, possess or buy firearms. According to the announcement, the VA will work with the FBI to remove all past reporting.

The veterans community has been split on their support for the requirement, with organizations such as Blue Star Families, an advocacy group for active-duty military personnel and their dependents, supporting the status quo when it first came under debate in 2017.

Others, such as the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, have lobbied for the change, saying the policy harmed veterans who need VA health care but were reluctant to seek it for fear of being referred to the database.

In 2023, the most recent year for data on veteran suicide, firearms were used in 73.3% of the 6,398 suicides recorded by the VA. On Tuesday, Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, noted that guns are used in a majority of veteran suicide and called the change “dangerous and reckless.”

Blumenthal refuted the VA’s claim that the referral process has been conducted by persons who lack the legal authority or capacity to make a judgement based on a fiduciary assignment, noting that the determinations were made “through a comprehensive process with robust due process protections.”

“This Administration should be focused on measures that will actually help end veteran suicide and make our communities safer. Eliminating this policy and weakening the NICS background check system altogether is a disastrous decision that will have potentially tragic impacts for years to come,” Blumenthal said.

But Committee Chairman Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, said that in making the change, the VA had corrected a wrong, and he urged colleagues to support legislation to make the decision permanent.

“No veteran should be penalized or stripped of their right to legally purchase and own a firearm without due process simply because they sought assistance from VA regarding their finances or earned benefits,” Moran said.

For more than 41,000 active-duty and activated Reserve members, the lack of funding means working without pay, although they likely will not feel the effects until the next scheduled military payday Feb. 27, which they could miss if Congress can’t reach an agreement immediately after reconvening.

Coast Guard Vice Commandant Vice Adm. Thomas Allan said Wednesday that a shutdown of more than a few days would harm morale and affect pay during a time when the Coast Guard is working to improve recruitment and grow its force.

Testifying before a House appropriations subcommittee, Allan said the issue was not a “distant administrative issue” for the men and women of the Coast Guard and those who rely on the service.

“The uncertainty of missing paychecks negatively impacts readiness and creates a significant financial hardship for service members and their families,” Allan said.

During a shutdown that spanned December 2018 and January 2019, Coast Guard members missed several paychecks, and although they eventually received their back pay, were deeply affected by the lapse in funding, forcing some to turn to charities and food pantries to cover their bills and eat.

“The gunner’s mate manning a weapon in the Strait of Hormuz should not have to worry if their family will be able to pay rent while being shadowed by Iranian vessels,” Allan told subcommittee members Wednesday. “Our aviation survival technician deploying from a helicopter into treacherous seas should not have to worry if their family can buy groceries this week.”

He added that some training for pilots, aircrews and boat crews would be suspended and maintenance would be deferred, resulting in grounded aircraft, berthed cutters and a parts backlog.

The shutdown also will halt some fisheries enforcement operations, commercial vessel inspections and merchant mariner credentialing.

Coast Guard leadership did not provide further details to Military Times on Friday about the shutdown’s impact and referred all questions to the White House.

The Coast Guard has nearly 10,000 civilian employees, all of whom also will be affected by the shutdown in some way. Under procedures published by the federal Office of Personnel Management and Budget, civilian Coast Guard employees are designated either as nonexempt from furlough or considered essential or exempt because their jobs are necessary for national security or involve protection of life or property.

The roughly two-thirds of the Coast Guard’s civilian work force who are nonexempt will be furloughed and required not to do any work nor receive any pay during the shutdown. Essential employees will continue working without pay.

Whether both groups eventually will receive pay could depend on the final DHS funding bill. During the lengthy 43-day federal shutdown last fall, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019 does not guarantee back pay automatically and Congress must include the requirement in the appropriations law.

The Homeland Security shutdown affects numerous agencies that fall under the department, including the Transportation Security Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency and others.

The shutdown is the result of an impasse between congressional Republicans and Democrats over immigration enforcement operations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection and other federal law enforcement that have led to the deportation of thousands of noncitizens, the detention of some American citizens and U.S. veterans and killings of two American citizens in Minneapolis in January.

CBP and ICE largely will be unaffected by the shutdown because they received funding in the Trump administration’s federal and economic investment package known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.