House Veterans' Affairs committee debates accountability, access, firearms reporting and student-benefit bills amid dispute over mass VA terminations

The House Committee on Veterans' Affairs on Feb. 14 heard testimony on four bills aimed at altering how the Department of Veterans Affairs handles employee discipline, firearms reporting, community care and restoration of education benefits while lawmakers sparred over recent mass terminations of VA employees.

Chairman Bost opened the hearing by describing measures he had sponsored, including H.R. 472, the Restore VA Accountability Act of 2025, and two access and rights bills (H.R. 1041, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, and H.R. 740, the Veterans Access Act of 2025). He told the committee, "I am proud to have introduced my bill, H.R. 472, the Restore VA Accountability Act of 2025," and framed the proposals as steps to hold underperforming employees accountable and expand veterans' access to community care.

The committee’s ranking member, Rep. Takano, sharply contested that framing, saying the recent dismissals have harmed veterans and veteran employees. Takano described outreach from fired VA employees and family members and warned the dismissals were already affecting clinic openings and recruiting. "We are in the midst of a constitutional crisis," Takano said during his opening comments, arguing the terminations were arbitrary and were harming veterans' access to care.

Nut graf: The hearing combined bill markup-style testimony and broad oversight questions. Witnesses from VA, veterans service organizations and veterans themselves gave generally mixed reviews of the bills: VA officials said they supported or supported the intent of several measures but recommended technical amendments; veterans groups supported many proposals while warning about budget and operational risks; and committee Democrats raised concerns about recent terminations of roughly 1,400 probationary VA employees and potential impacts on care and suicide-prevention efforts.

VA witnesses and agency positions

Beth Murphy, acting principal deputy under secretary for benefits at the Department of Veterans Affairs, told the committee that VA supports H.R. 1391, the Student Veterans Benefit Restoration Act, and supports H.R. 1041 and the unnamed Second Amendment discussion draft "but also notes risks with both aspects of the bills." She emphasized that VA "has continuously complied with all legal reporting requirements to the Department of Justice for recording individuals on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS," and said VA would implement laws as written while recommending clarifying language to avoid criminal exposure for veterans in certain circumstances. Murphy also said VA "strongly supports the intent of H.R. 740, the Veterans Access Act of 2025," and described proposed changes to referral and wait-time procedures that VA is already working to align with.

Tracy Tharrett, chief human capital officer at the Office of Human Resources and Administration, testified that "approximately 1,400 employees have been terminated during their probationary period," and repeatedly declined to provide operational details during the hearing, offering instead to provide certain information for the record. Tharrett told Rep. Takano she would answer some questions later and emphasized that she used authorities within the Code of Federal Regulations and followed direction from the Office of Personnel Management on hiring and probationary actions.

Dr. Sanchayan Yandy, chief medical officer for VHA's integrated veterans care, repeatedly stressed that "community care is VA care," and said VA is working to standardize screening and reduce referral timeframes for residential mental health and substance use treatment; he said VA had begun aligning internal processes with the Access Act's proposed thresholds (priority referrals within 48 hours, nonpriority within 20 days) though some procedural tweaks would be required if the bill becomes law.

Key legislative specifics and competing concerns

- Restore VA Accountability Act (H.R. 472): Chairman Bost said the bill would "protect veterans care and the taxpayers investment by holding VA employees accountable." VA officials said they supported the concept but recommended technical changes to reduce litigation risk and to clarify how new disciplinary authorities would interact with existing law, including proposed modifications to 38 U.S.C. sections (discussed generally by VA as sections to be amended). Democrats raised constitutional and labor concerns, warning the bill could supersede collective bargaining agreements and limit consideration of longstanding factors (the Douglas factors) used in federal discipline decisions.

- Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act (H.R. 1041) and discussion draft on NICS reporting: Chairman Bost and witnesses described a practice in which the appointment of a VA fiduciary has, in some earlier periods, triggered referral to the FBI’s NICS. Bost said VA had reported "over 250,000 veterans" in the past; a witness from Mission Roll Call cited a figure of more than 270,000 reported to NICS since 1998. Murphy told the committee that since the Consolidated Appropriations Act (March 2024) VA's reporting has changed and that, under the current construct, VA has reported far fewer—she testified that since March 2024 VA had reported three individuals. VA recommended statutory language to exempt certain fiduciary determinations from DOJ's definitions to avoid criminal exposure and reiterated the agency's commitment to suicide-prevention measures tied to fiduciary appointments (for example, new fact sheets distributed to prospective fiduciaries effective Feb. 14, 2025).

- Veterans Access Act (H.R. 740): Supporters, including Mission Roll Call and VFW witnesses, said the bill would clarify that "community care is VA care," standardize wait- and distance-based referral rules, and expand access to residential mental health services. VA witnesses said they supported the bill’s intent and were already implementing some related screening and wait-time tracking measures, but both VA and veterans service organizations warned the bill does not by itself solve staffing or oversight issues that affect timely scheduling and consistency across regions.

- Student Veterans Benefit Restoration Act (H.R. 1391): Representative Ramirez, sponsor of the bill, described the measure’s mandatory restoration provisions for veterans defrauded by educational institutions and said it passed the House in the prior Congress with bipartisan support ("406 votes in favor"). VA told the committee it supports H.R. 1391 but recommended technical changes so institutions, not students, repay VA funds where appropriate.

Oversight and the probational-term dismissals

Much of the hearing focused on recent workforce actions at VA. Ranking Member Takano and several Democrats repeatedly questioned whether the removal of roughly 1,400 probationary employees was conducted with sufficient review, and whether those actions would affect veterans' care, recruitment and suicide-prevention efforts. Tharrett repeatedly deferred detailed operational answers for the record and said OPM provided direction; she acknowledged the number of terminations but declined to provide itemized breakdowns during the hearing.

Veterans service organizations and veteran witnesses expressed a mix of support for accountability and deep concern about the mass terminations. Patrick Murphy of the Veterans of Foreign Wars told the committee the VFW supports stronger accountability but urged oversight to ensure vital positions and veteran employees were not let go arbitrarily. Max Rose, senior advisor to the Veterans Voice Foundation and a former member of Congress, described VA facilities he had used as "a home" and warned that terminations of front-desk, hotline and support staff can directly affect care coordination and patient safety.

Budget and implementation risks

Witnesses raised budget and implementation questions connected to expanding community care. VFW and other witnesses warned that growth in community-care expenditures has been rapid in recent years and that third-party administrators have faced allegations of overpayments. The VFW noted an OIG report and cautioned that increased community-care access without adequate controls could raise unpredictable costs and fragment medical records and quality oversight.

Ending: The committee did not record final votes on the measures during the hearing. Members from both parties asked for follow-up information, and VA officials frequently offered to provide additional details for the record. Chairman Bost said he would continue to pursue the bills and that the committee would work with VA on technical fixes; Democrats sought a separate, focused oversight hearing on the recent terminations. No formal actions or votes were taken on the floor of the committee during the session reported in the transcript.