ACCORDING TO THE MICHIGAN'S
VETERANS AFFAIRS AGENCY, IN
ADDITION TO BEING TECHNICAL
EXPERTS IN THE FIELD, STAFF
SERGEANTS, TECHNICAL SERGEANTS,
AND PETTY OFFICERS, FIRST
CLASSES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
DELEGATING, REVIEWING WORK,
EVALUATING PERFORMANCE AND
COUNSELING SERVICES. MEMBERS IN
MATTERS BOTH PROFESSIONAL AND
PERSONAL. THESE MEN AND WOMEN
HAVE DEVELOPED UNIQUE SKILLS
THAT MORE THAN PREPARE THEM FOR
WORK IN THE CIVIL SERVICE. OUR
VETERANS ARE EXPERIENCED PUBLIC
SERVANTS, AND WE CAN ONLY
BENEFIT FROM RECOGNIZING THEIR
UNIQUE POTENTIAL. SB 943 WOULD
UNLEASH THIS UNTAPPED POTENTIAL
BY MIRRORING MICHIGAN'S
INITIATIVE AND AUTHORIZING HR TO
CREATE A WAIVER FOR BACHELOR'S
DEGREE REQUIREMENTS FOR VETERANS
WHO SERVED AT THE CLASSIFICATION
OF E-6 FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS.
BY ENSURING WORTHY CANDIDATES
ARE NOT OVERLOOKED. SB 943 WILL
EXPAND CURRENT EFFORTS, SUCH AS
THE GOVERNOR'S AUGUST 2023
EXECUTIVE ORDER TO REMOVE
BARRIERS TO ENTRY INTO THE CIVIL
SERVICE AND EXPAND OUR POOL OF
ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS WITH ME TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT IS SETH REEB
AND REEB. WITH REEB, GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SETH WITH
REEB. GOVERNMENT RELATIONS.
BEFORE YOU BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO
JUST POINT OUT THAT THE LEAD
WITNESSES WILL HAVE THREE
MINUTES. THANK YOU. GO RIGHT
AHEAD. CALIFORNIA VETERANS
POPULATION IS SIGNIFICANT BUT
DECREASING, WITH A NOTABLE
EXODUS OF VETERANS FROM THE
STATE. THIS BILL IS ESSENTIAL TO
REVERSE THIS TREND AND LEVERAGE
THE SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE OF OUR
VETERANS. SIMILAR INITIATIVES IN
THE STATE HAVE SHOWN POSITIVE
RESULTS IN ATTRACTING SKILLED
VETERANS TO CIVIL SERVICE ROLES.
I'M HERE PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY
VETERAN SERVICE OFFICERS,
CALIFORNIA STATE COMMANDERS
VETERANS COUNCIL, AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SERVICE, BY THE WAY. AND NOW TO
HEAR FROM OTHER SUPPORT
WITNESSES, THE MICROPHONE IS
THERE. YOU'RE WELCOME TO STEP UP
IN SUPPORT. IF NOT THEN LET'S GO
AHEAD. AND IF ANYONE HAS
OPPOSITION OF THE BILL. AND
SEEING NONE, MEMBERS I MOVE THE
BILL. OKAY AND, I WOULD JUST
LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND THANK YOU,
SENATOR, FOR BRINGING THIS, BILL
FORWARD. I THINK SENATE BILL
943, IT'S OUTSTANDING. AND IT'S
ABOUT TIME WE RECOGNIZE OUR
VETERANS WHO SERVED WITH HONOR
AND DISTINCTION AND ACTUALLY DID
A MILITARY JOB THAT COULD NOT BE
DONE BY MANY OTHERS, BUT THEIR
KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL AT THE LEVEL
OF AN E-6, OBVIOUSLY IS
EQUIVALENT TO AN EDUCATIONAL
KNOWLEDGE. AND I THINK THAT IT'S
OUTSTANDING. SO I'LL BE
SUPPORTING THE BILL. AND AGAIN,
I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR
PRESENTING IT. AND WE HAVE THE
BILL MOVED, BY SENATE SENATOR
SHANNON GROVE. SO WE'RE GOING TO
HOLD THAT OVER UNTIL WE GET
EVERYBODY IN. BUT I THINK WE CAN
VOTE, SO THE SENATE
.
IS EVERYBODY'S JUMPING BACK AND
FORTH AS AS YOU CAN SEE, EVEN
COMMITTEES MOVING. SO WE HAVE A
MOTION AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND
BRING IT BACK WHEN IT'S TIME FOR
VOTE. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF. OKAY, SIR.
HAVING ESTABLISHING A QUORUM.
YEAH. SECRETARY, GO AHEAD AND
ESTABLISH A QUORUM. I THINK
WE'VE GOT THAT. THANK YOU, SIR.
ARCHULETA HERE. GROVE HERE.
ALVARADO. GILL, PRESENT.
MENGIBAR. UMBERG. SO, SIR, WE DO
HAVE A QUORUM. OKAY THAT MEANS
WE CAN TAKE A VOTE. OH, YEAH. SO
LET'S DO THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
MOTION ON CONSENT CALENDAR.
MOTION WE HAVE IT. ARCHULETA I
GROVE. ALVARADO. GILL MENGIBAR.
UMBERG OKAY. GOOD. SENATOR, WE
JUST HAD FINISHED, BOTH. SO
WE'LL COME BACK TO IT. I JUST I
JUST DID. OH, THAT'S RIGHT. AS A
MATTER OF FACT, WHY DON'T WE GO
AHEAD AND BRING THAT UP? HOLY.
OKAY. AS LONG AS WE HAVE THE
THREE. BECAUSE SHE MIGHT LEAVE.
OKAY. SENATE BILL 943 DO PASS.
BUT FIRST WE REFER TO
APPROPRIATIONS. ARCHULETA Ã
GROVE. ALVARADO GILL A MENGIBAR
UMBERG. OKAY, HOLD THAT ROLL.
HOLD THAT. WE'LL HOLD THAT OVER.
WE HAVE THREE VOTES ON THAT
MOTION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
NEXT. HERE WE GO. NEXT UP,
SENATOR JOHN LAIRD. AS WE USED
TO SAY, FRONT AND CENTER.
WELCOME THERE'S NO SENATOR MIKE.
AND YOU'RE PRESENTING SENATE
BILL 1097. PLEASE GO RIGHT AHEAD
. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.
CHAIR. AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS,
SENATE BILL 1097 WILL UPDATE THE
MILITARY AND VETERANS CODE TO
USE GENDER INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE
AND CLARIFY THAT BENEFITS AND
PROTECTIONS PROVIDED TO
SURVIVING SPOUSES ARE ALSO
AVAILABLE TO DOMESTIC PARTNERS
AND CLOSE A MINOR LOOPHOLE TO
CLARIFY THAT ONLY SERVICE
MEMBERS ON ACTIVE MILITARY
ORDERS SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM JURY
DUTY. THIS BILL IS DESIGNED TO
KEEP PACE WITH OUR LAWS. WE HAVE
ARCHAIC REFERENCES THAT ONLY
REFER TO ONE GENDER OR DON'T
UPDATE THE LAW ON MARRIAGE AND
THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES. A
PRIME EXAMPLE OF THIS ISSUE CAN
BE FOUND IN THE MILITARY AND
VETERANS CODES CODE, WHICH FEELS
FEATURES MALE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE
ALL THE WAY THROUGH. AND SO IT
FAILS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE GROWING
NUMBER OF WOMEN AS WELL AS
NON-BINARY AS VETERANS,
INCLUDING MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE, INCLUDING THE PERSON
THAT'S STANDING UP AND GETTING
READY TO WALK OUT. SHE IS A
VETERAN THAT SHOULD BE A FULL
SHE SHOULD BE FULLY LISTENING,
BUT SHE ALSO SHOULD BE FULLY
COVERED IN THE CODE
APPROPRIATELY SO IT DOESN'T. IT
ISN'T MALE SPECIFIC, AND THE
DEDICATED SERVICE OF THESE
INDIVIDUALS, INCLUDING
INDIVIDUALS LIKE SECRETARY
LINDSEY SIN OF THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
DESERVES RECOGNITION. I DID A
SIMILAR BILL A COUPLE OF YEARS
AGO BECAUSE THE COMMANDER OF THE
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL,
AMANDA RAY, WAS THE FIRST WOMAN
WOMAN EVER TO BE COMMANDER OF
THE HIGHWAY PATROL. AND EVERY
REFERENCE TO THE COMMANDER OF
THE HIGHWAY PATROL IN THE CODE
REFERRED TO HE. AND SO I
AUTHORED A BILL WITH THE SUPPORT
OF PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM THAT MADE
IT MORE APPROPRIATE FOR WHO IS
ACTUALLY FILLING THESE POSITIONS
AT TIMES, I MENTIONED THAT THERE
ARE ALSO EXISTS A CURRENT,
LOOPHOLE IN THE LAW THAT ALLOWS
PEOPLE TO SEEK ABSENCE FROM JURY
DUTY IF THEY'VE SERVED AS A
MEMBER OF ACTIVE MILITIA IN THE
PRIOR YEAR, EVEN WHEN THEY'RE
CAPABLE OF SERVING ON A JURY.
THIS SAYS THAT YOU REALLY HAVE
TO BE THE PAPERS OF ACTIVE DUTY.
IT ALSO CERTAIN BENEFITS AND
PROTECTIONS ARE PROVIDED TO
SURVIVING SPOUSES OF VETERANS.
BUT CURRENT LAW IS NOT CLEAR IF
IT EXPANDS OR EXTENDS TO
DOMESTIC PARTNERS. THIS MAKES A
CLARIFICATION. SO THIS BILL
CLARIFIES THAT CERTAIN BENEFITS
AND PROTECTIONS ARE PROVIDED TO
PROVIDING SPOUSES, CORRECTS THE
LANGUAGE, CORRECTS THE LOOPHOLE
ON JURY DUTY. THE BILL HAS NO
OPPOSITION. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE, AND I DO NOT
HAVE A PRIMARY WITNESS TODAY.
OKAY, WELL, LET'S ASK AND SEE IF
THERE'S ANYONE HERE IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL. THE WELCOME TO
ADDRESS THE MIC. IF I SEE NONE
IN, SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION OF THE
BILL, I SEE NONE. AND YOU'RE
CLOSING, SENATOR, I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN IPHONE MOTION, WELL,
LET ME MAKE A QUICK COMMENT.
COMMENTS. YES, PLEASE. I'M SORRY
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. MY
WIFE AND DAUGHTER WOULD BE VERY,
VERY DISAPPOINTED IN ME IF I DID
NOT MOVE THIS BILL. SO I MOVE
THE BILL. OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION.
IF YOU DIDN'T, GOOD. AND, MADAM
SECRETARY, CALL THE ROLL. SENATE
BILL 1097, THE MOTION IS TO
PASS. BUT FIRST, WE REFER TO
JUDICIARY. ARCHULETA Ã
ARCHULETA I GROVE ALVARADO. GIL
I ALVARADO. GIL I MENGIBAR
UMBERG I UMBERG I THAT BILL DOES
PASS OUT, SIR. BUT YOU WANT TO
KEEP THE BILL OPEN? WE'LL KEEP
THE ROLL OPEN. YOU'VE GOT THREE
EYES. AND THANK YOU FOR
PRESENTING IT. THANK YOU. MR.
THE GENERAL IS VERY HAPPY. OKAY
ALL RIGHT. SO NEXT UP WE HAVE
SENATOR DORADO AND MENGIBAR. BUT
AS I HAD MENTIONED, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, EVERYBODY IS RUNNING
FROM ROOM TO ROOM. SO WE'LL TAKE
A HOPEFULLY JUST A FIVE MINUTE
BREAK UNTIL THEY WALK IN. OKAY.
OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD. AND, BRING
THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER. AND,
SENATOR DORADO, WE'RE GOING TO
TAKE YOU OUT OF ORDER AND TAKE
YOURS, UNTIL WE GET SENATOR
MENGIBAR TO COME UP. SO WITH
THAT, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE
PRESENTING SENATE BILL 1500, SO
GO RIGHT AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, SB 1500 WILL
CHANGE STATUTORY GUIDELINES FROM
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND TAX
CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE TO
REDUCE THE BARRIERS TO PERMANENT
HOUSING FOR UNHOUSED PEOPLE, I
DECIDED TO TAKE UP THIS BILL AND
INTRODUCE IT ON BEHALF OF THE
GREAT WORK THAT MAYOR KAREN BASS
IS DOING IN LOS ANGELES. SHE'S
LIKE, JUST DUG IN AND IS LOOKING
FOR EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE WAY,
TO MAKE HOUSING AVAILABLE,
OBVIOUSLY THE COST OF HOUSING
HAS INCREASED TREMENDOUSLY,
ESPECIALLY LOW AND EXTREMELY LOW
INCOME, AND TO HELP PROVIDE
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW
INCOME INDIVIDUALS, CITIES LIKE
LOS ANGELES OVER THE STATE
PROVIDE VOUCHER PROGRAMS. AND
THOSE VOUCHER PROGRAMS ARE MEANT
TO INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPERS TO
HOUSE SUCH LOW INCOME
PROSPECTIVE TENANTS WHO, WHO MAY
NOT HAVE THE IMMEDIATELY HAVE
THE MEANS TO SECURE THEIR, THEIR
OWN HOUSING, I'M GOING TO HAVE,
MY, PRIMARY WITNESS HERE, FROM
THE LA CITY MAYOR'S OFFICE TO
HELP ANSWER QUESTIONS. AND I'LL
JUST LET HIM GIVE THE FULL
PRESENTATION. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. I'D LIKE TO REMIND YOUR
WITNESS THAT WE HAVE THREE
MINUTES. SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN,
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS FREDDY
QUINTANA, AND I SERVE AS THE
SENIOR DIRECTOR OF STATE AFFAIRS
TO LOS ANGELES MAYOR KAREN BASS,
AND SINCE SHE'S TAKEN OFFICE,
THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES HAS MADE
GREAT STRIDES TO CUT THROUGH THE
RED TAPE THAT WAS FACING
CHALLENGING PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS FROM COMING
INDOORS, THEY'VE GONE FROM
HAVING TO FILL OUT 30 PLUS PAGE
QUESTIONNAIRES TO, FOR US, BEING
ABLE TO GET WAIVER AUTHORITY
FROM HUD TO ALLOW THEM TO DO
SELF CERTIFICATION OF VARIOUS
THINGS SUCH AS INCOME, SOCIAL
SECURITY NUMBERS, DISABILITY
STATUS AND THEIR DATE OF BIRTH
TO IN ORDER TO GET INTO A
PERMANENT HOUSING UNIT AND THEN
HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME TO PROVE
THEIR ELIGIBILITY TO STAY IN
THAT HOUSING UNIT. WHAT WE FOUND
ON THE BACK END OF IT IS THAT
SOME OF THESE DEVELOPERS HAVE
GONE THROUGH, AND OPERATORS HAVE
GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS TO GET
CERTAIN AGREEMENTS WITH, HCD OR
TCAC. AND IN THAT PROCESS OF IT,
THEY ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS, THAT
MAY CAUSE AN ISSUE IF THAT
ELIGIBILITY INCOME FOR THAT
INDIVIDUAL BECOMES OUTSIDE OF
THE ELIGIBILITY BRACKET. SO, FOR
INSTANCE, IN THE CITY OF LOS
ANGELES, AN AMI, FOR A FAMILY OF
TWO IS ONLY $2,500 A MONTH,
APPROXIMATELY. IF YOU HIT A
DOLLAR OVER THAT, YOU ARE
RISKING ANY PROGRAM THAT YOU MAY
HAVE ENTERED INTO FOR A 30% AMI
UNIT. AND THAT GOES ON A CASE BY
CASE, UNIT BY UNIT BASIS. SO WE
HAVE THEN NOW WORKED WITH THE
GOOD SENATOR FROM LOS ANGELES TO
CREATE A STATUTORY GUIDELINE TO
SAY IN THE EVENT A PERSON
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS COMES
INDOORS AND THEY HAVE A AMI THAT
COMES OUT TO BE ABOVE 30, BUT
BELOW 60, THEY WOULD BE COUNTED
AS A 30% FOR THE PERIOD OF TIME
TO ALLOW THEM TO STAY IN THAT
UNIT AND THEN TRY TO, RE CURE
THAT ISSUE OVER THE COMING 24
MONTHS, EITHER MAYBE GOING INTO
AN ALTERNATIVE UNIT TO HIRE AMI
OR GETTING FURTHER DOCUMENTATION
THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS IN REALITY
THAT THEIR AGGREGATED INCOME IS
ACTUALLY BELOW THE 30% AMI
THRESHOLD. WITH THAT, WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE. LET ME ASK YOU, IF I MAY,
BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO MY
SENATORS HERE ON THE COMMITTEE,
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT VETERANS
THAT ARE FINDING THEMSELVES IN
THIS CATEGORY AND THIS PROBLEM
THAT NOT AND I KNOW THE GREAT
MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES IS VERY PRO
VETERAN AS OUR SENATOR BEFORE US
RIGHT NOW IS SO PHÐ THIS WAS
BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION
BECAUSE OF NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS
BY THE VETERANS COMMUNITY TRYING
TO OBTAIN HOUSING THERE IN LOS
ANGELES. WHAT IT IS, ACTUALLY IS
WE LOOKED AT ALL THE PROGRAMS
THAT SERVE THAT ARE SERVED,
UNDER THE HCD OR VETERANS
AFFAIRS AND INCIDENCE. SOME OF
THEIR PROGRAMS ARE IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT
WHEN THOSE OPERATORS BUILD THOSE
UNITS, THAT THEY ARE EQUALLY
APPLIED IN THE COVERAGE TO A
VETERAN AND NOT JUST A GENERAL
PERSON EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS, WANTED TO COVER
BOTH POPULATION WITH THESE
PROGRAMS. THANK YOU. LET ME OPEN
IT UP FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. ANY QUESTIONS
? I HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE THE
BILL. ALL RIGHT. SENATE BILL
1500 DO PASS JUST SECOND FOR
CLOSING, SENATOR, THIS,
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SENATE
BILL 1500, THE MOTION IS Dð
PASS. BUT FIRST, WE REFER TO
APPROPRIATIONS. ARCHULETA Ã
ARCHULETA. AYE. GROVE. ALVARADO.
GIL ALVARADO. GIL. AYE.
MENGIBAR. UMBERG AYE. UMBERG.
AYE. THAT BILL DOES PASS OUT THE
ROLE. WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THE
ROLL OPEN. AND THANK YOU FOR
PRESENTING IT. AND THANK YOU FOR
YOUR VISIT FROM LOS ANGELES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
OKAY, SO WE'LL TAKE A MINUTE OUT
UNTIL WE GET OUR LAST AND FINAL
Ó. WE HAVE TWO MORE. I'M SORRY.
LET'S SEE ACROSS THE HALL. OKAY
ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU LIKE US TO
CALL YOU? IF YOU CAN. CAN YOU
BREAK AWAY?
.
YEAH. OKAY, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN
UP THE ROLL. GO AHEAD FOR THE
VOTING. NOT YET. GOT IT. WE NEED
THE THUMBS UP. OH I THINK WE
HAVE IT. WE'RE HAVING SOME
CAMERA DIFFICULTIES HERE. YES.
OKAY. WE'RE GOOD. WE'VE GOT THE
TECHNICAL PROBLEMS WORKED OUT.
NOW, LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE
ROLL, SO IF YOU WOULD GO AHEAD,
LET'S GO AHEAD AND START WITH
THE VERY FIRST ONE, WHICH WHICH
WAS, SENATE BILL 943, SENATE
BILL 943. SENATE BILL 943 DO
PASS. BUT FIRST WE REFER TO
APPROPRIATIONS MENGIBAR UMBERG
UMBERG I. SO THAT DOES PASS OUT,
SIR. I HAVE THE 943. THAT'S NOT
CORRECT. NO, NO IT WAS SHE
APPEARED. OH, YEAH. SHE
REQUESTED TO TAKE IT OFF CONSENT
AND TO APPEAR. AND SHE DID CHAIR
VOTED. AYE. OKAY IN THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. OKAY. NEXT ONE. IT'S,
CONSENT CALENDAR. NOT YET, NOT
YET. OKAY. CONSENT CALENDAR.
CONSENT CALENDAR. ALVARADO. GIL.
ALVARADO. GIL I MENGIBAR UMBERG
I UMBERG I THAT CONSENT CALENDAR
PASSES OUT, SIR. OKAY, THEN WE
HAD, SENATE BILL 1097. SENATE
BILL 1097. THE MOTION IS TO
PASS, BUT FIRST WE REFER TO
JUDICIAL. SORRY, JUDICIARY GROVE
MENGIBAR. THEY'VE ALREADY VOTED
ON THIS ONE, OKAY. AND THEY'VE
ALREADY VOTED ON THIS ONE, SIR.
SO ALL RIGHT. AND THEN SENATE
BILL 1500. DURAZZO. WE'RE GOOD.
YOU WERE IN THERE. YOU WERE OKAY
. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE ALL
CAUGHT UP. THANK YOU.
OKAY SO THAT YOU'RE NOT LYING.
OKAY, OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO PAUSE
RIGHT NOW TILL WE CONTINUE
WAITING
ALL RIGHT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,
WE'VE GOT OUR SENATOR IN. SO,
PLEASE, SENATOR CABALLERO,
YOU'VE GOT, SIX XJR SIX, GO
RIGHT AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT S¼ R SIX,
AN IMPORTANT BILL TO DENOUNCE
THE HISTORIC DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST THE LGBTQ PLUS COMMUNITY
CREATED UNDER THE US MILITARY'S
DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL POLICY.
XJR SIX CALLS UPON THE UNITED
STATES CONGRESS AND THE
PRESIDENT TO CREATE AN EFFECTIVE
REMEDY TO ADDRESS THE OTHER THAN
HONORABLE AND THE HONORABLE
DISHONORABLE DISCHARGES ISSUED
UNDER THE DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL
POLICY THAT HAVE NEGATIVELY,
NEGATIVELY IMPACTED THE LGBTQ
MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY AND TO
RESTORE THE BENEFITS THEY'RE
ENTITLED TO UNDER THE DON'T ASK,
DON'T TELL POLICY. IF A MEMBER
OF THE MILITARY IDENTIFIED AS A
MEMBER OF THE LGBT COMMUNITY, IT
COULD LEAD TO A DISHONORABLE OR
AN OTHER THAN HONORABLE
DISCHARGE. VETERANS THAT RECEIVE
THESE DISCHARGES LOST ACCESS TO
THEIR MILITARY BENEFITS, SUCH AS
HEALTH CARE, COLLEGE TUITION
ASSISTANCE, EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITIES, AND RETIREMENT
BENEFITS. BETWEEN 1994 AND 2011,
THE DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL POLICY
UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LED TO THE DISCHARGE OF MORE
THAN 14,000 SERVICE MEMBERS.
ADDITIONALLY PRIOR TO THAT, THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE ESTABLISHED POLICIES
THAT PENALIZED MILITARY MEMBERS
AND RESULTED IN THE DISCHARGE OF
GAY, LESBIAN, AND BISEXUAL
MEMBERS REGARDLESS OF SERVICE TO
THE COUNTRY AND GOOD MILITARY
SERVICE. DURING THE 1980S, MORE
THAN 17,000 MILITARY MEMBERS
WERE DISMISSED FROM THEIR DUTIES
DUE TO THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
IN 2010, THE DON'T ASK, DON'T
TELL POLICY WAS REPEALED BY
PRESIDENT OBAMA, WHICH ALLOWED
MEMBERS TO SERVE OPENLY WITHOUT
FEAR OF DISCHARGE AND CREATED A
PROCESS FOR DISCHARGE. MEMBERS
TO AMEND THEIR STATUS THROUGH
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS. THE REVIEW
PROCESS TO GRANT BENEFITS TO A
MEMBER WHO HAS BEEN WRONGFULLY
DISCHARGED IS MADE ON A CASE BY
CASE BASIS. THIS VETERANS
REQUIRE AN ADVOCATE TO GATHER
AND SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION FOR THE
VA'S REVIEW, INCLUDING SERVICE
RECORDS, INCIDENT DETAILS,
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE AND
PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS. THE
CURRENT PROCESS TO UPGRADE THE
STATUS OF DISCHARGED VETERANS IS
UNNECESSARY, BURDENSOME, ADDING
COMPLEXITY TO AN ALREADY
STRAINED RELATIONSHIP, FORCING
VETERANS TO REVISIT A DIFFICULT
TIME IN THEIR LIFE CAN CREATE AN
EMOTIONAL BARRIER FOR MANY. IN
MANY CASES, REENGAGING WITH THE
DEPARTMENT THAT DISCRIMINATED
AGAINST THEM COULD WORSEN.
VETERANS TRAUMA AND AMPLIFY
FEELINGS OF SHAME, ANXIETY, AND
ANGER. COR SIX URGES THE
PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS TO
ESTABLISH A STRAIGHTFORWARD
PROCESS, PROVIDE LEGAL AID, AND
RECTIFY THE WRONGFUL DISCHARGE
OR MISCLASSIFICATION OF VETERANS
BASED ON THEIR SEXUAL
ORIENTATION TO ENSURE THEY
RECEIVE THE BENEFITS TO WHICH
THEY ARE ENTITLED DUE TO THEIR
HONORABLE SERVICE IN THE
MILITARY. WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL
AND HELP ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS
IS JONATHAN WILLETT, A UNITED
STATES AIR FORCE VETERAN, AND
STEPHANIE WADE, UNITED STATES
MARINE CORPS VETERAN AND BOARD
MEMBER OF EQUALITY CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU, SENATOR, AND TO
REMIND OUR WITNESSES, YOU HAVE
THREE MINUTES. SO PLEASE, YOU
HAVE THE FLOOR. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHAIR ARCHULETA. SENATORS, THANK
YOU FOR LETTING US SPEAK TODAY.
AND THANK YOU TO THE SENATOR FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL, I'M A
TRANSGENDER WOMAN, AND UNLIKE MY
FRIEND JONATHAN, WHO YOU'LL HEAR
FROM NEXT, I WAS HONORABLY
DISCHARGED BECAUSE I
SUCCESSFULLY HID WHO I AM FOR
THE ENTIRETY OF MY EIGHT AND A
HALF YEARS OF SERVICE. SO I WANT
TO TELL YOU WHY COMPREHENSIVE
DISCHARGE REFORM IS CRITICAL TO
EVERY SINGLE LGBTQ PLUS VETERAN,
NO MATTER WHAT TYPE OF DISCHARGE
THEY RECEIVED. LIKE EVERY OTHER
QUEER PERSON WHO SERVED BETWEEN
1949 AND 2015, I HID WHILE
PEOPLE JUST LIKE ME WERE HUNTED,
PERSECUTED, AND KICKED OUT. I
SAW THIS HAPPEN TO MORE THAN A
DOZEN SAILORS AND MARINES THAT I
SERVED WITH, PEOPLE I KNEW BY
NAME, SOME OF THEM CLOSE FRIENDS
. I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THE
SHAME AND THE TRAUMA WE
SUFFERED, STAYING SILENT AND
SOMETIMES BECOMING COMPLICIT.
HERE IS JUST ONE OF THOSE
STORIES. IN 1986, A MARINE IN
THE BARRACKS IMMEDIATELY
ADJACENT TO MINE WAS CAUGHT IN A
HOMOSEXUAL ACT WITH ANOTHER
MARINE WHO CLAIMED THAT HE HAD
BEEN ASLEEP AND THAT THE ACT WAS
NOT CONSENSUAL. IT WAS MY
UNDERSTANDING THEN, AND IT SEEMS
EVEN MORE LIKELY NOW, THAT THAT
SEX WAS CONSENSUAL. CONSENSUAL,
THAT WHEN CAUGHT, ONE MARINE
QUICKLY TURNED ON HIS SEX
PARTNER TO SAVE HIMSELF. BUT
EVEN IF IT WAS SEXUAL ASSAULT,
WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? NOBODY
DESERVES FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS
OR SO, WHILE HE WAS COURT
MARTIALED AND PROCESSED, THAT
MARINE WAS LEFT IN THE SAME OPEN
SQUAD. BAY WHERE HE RECEIVED
BLANKET PARTIES, MIDNIGHT
BEATINGS FROM HIS FELLOW
MARINES, AND EVERY MORNING WHEN
WE SAW HIM SHOW UP FOR
FORMATION, MY FELLOW MARINES
WOULD LAUGH AT HIS BRUISED AND
SWOLLEN FACE AND I JOINED THEM.
I LAUGHED TOO, HE WAS BEATEN SO
BADLY HIS OWN MOTHER WOULDN'T
HAVE RECOGNIZED HIM. I'M SURE HE
HAD SERIOUS CONCUSSIONS AND THE
KIND OF INJURIES THAT AFFECT A
PERSON FOR LIFE, BUT HE WAS
NEVER PLACED IN PROTECTIVE
CUSTODY. THOSE BEATINGS WERE
CONDONED AND VIGILANTE JUSTICE.
IT TURNED MY STOMACH, BUT I
LAUGHED. I LAUGHED BECAUSE IT
WAS SAFER TO BE AMONG THE
HUNTERS THAN THE HUNTED. I KNEW
THAT IF, IF MY FELLOW IF I
DIDN'T, MY FELLOW MARINES WOULD
SUSPECT ME THAT IF THEY
DISCOVERED THAT I WAS TRANS THAT
I'D GET THE SAME BRUTAL
TREATMENT. SENATORS, THAT IS THE
TERROR THAT KEPT US ALL IN THE
CLOSET. IT'S A MORAL INJURY THAT
STILL HAUNTS ALL OF US IN THE
PUBLIC'S IMAGINATION. THIS
PROBLEM HAS BEEN SOLVED. BUT AS
YOU'RE LEARNING TODAY, NO
MEANINGFUL PROVISION HAS BEEN
MADE FOR THE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF VETERANS WHO
SUFFERED THE WORST KIND OF
OFFICIAL BIGOTRY UNTIL IT'S
ADDRESSED. NO LGBTQ+ VETERAN
WILL FEEL VALUED BY THE NATION
THEY SERVED AND THOSE WHO SERVE
OPENLY TODAY WILL NOT BE FULLY
EQUAL. LET ME INTERRUPT FOR A
SECOND, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO HAVE
HIM ALSO TESTIFY. SO LET'S GO
AHEAD AND SHARE THE TIME THAT WE
HAVE. THANK YOU. AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU CHAIR, VICE CHAIR AND
ALL OTHER MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, MY NAME IS JONATHAN
WILLETT, AND I'M THE UNITED
STATES AIR FORCE VETERAN, I WAS
RAISED IN A MILITARY FAMILY.
EVERY MALE IN MY FAMILY HAS
SERVED IN MILITARY SINCE THE
CIVIL WAR, SERVED PROUDLY,
SERVED PROUDLY, MY FATHER,
RETIRED CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT
FROM THE AIR FORCE, HAS, HAS
CRIED IN FRONT OF ME TWO TIMES
IN HIS LIFE. THE FIRST TIME WHEN
I GRADUATED TOP OF MY CLASS IN
BASIC TRAINING, AND THE SECOND
TIME WAS WHEN I GOT KICKED OUT
OF THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE.
I THOUGHT BY SACRIFICING MY
IDENTITY AND GOING BACK IN THE
CLOSET WAS THE MOST HONORABLE
THING I COULD DO FOR MY COUNTRY.
AND I WAS WILLING TO DO WHATEVER
IT TOOK TO SERVE MY COUNTRY. I
WAS IN. AND I WAS AN AIRCRAFT
ARMAMENT SYSTEM SPECIALIST. I
WORK ON THE WEAPONS SYSTEMS OF
THE JETS. I WAS VERY GOOD AT
WHAT I DID, ESPECIALLY A LITTLE
GAY BOY COMING UP. BEING A BEING
A AN AIRCRAFT MECHANIC, AND I
WAS A STAR AIRMAN IN MY SHOP. I
WON SEVERAL AWARDS, YOU KNOW,
FOR, FOR WHAT I WAS DOING UNTIL
ONE DAY I GOT SICK AND I HAD TO
GO TO A CIVILIAN DOCTOR AND WHEN
I, WHEN MY SHOP CHIEF GOT MY
MEDICAL RECORDS, THE WORD
HOMOSEXUAL WAS WRITTEN ON IT. I
HAD NO IDEA. AND THEN I GOT
CALLED INTO MY FIRST SERGEANT'S
OFFICE THE NEXT DAY, AND THEY
INFORMED ME THEY WERE GOING TO
GIVE ME AN ARTICLE 15 FOR
FAILURE TO FAILURE TO REPORT TO
DUTY THAT NEXT DAY. THAT WAS THE
FIRST PIECE OF PAPERWORK THAT I
RECEIVED, AND FROM THEN ON, I
WAS GETTING IN TROUBLE FOR
THINGS THAT PEOPLE WOULD NEVER
GET IN TROUBLE FOR. PEOPLE LIKE
THINGS YOU'D GET AN ATTABOY FOR,
AND IT CONTINUED AND CONTINUED
AND CONTINUED UNTIL THEY GOT
ENOUGH STUFF TO KICK ME OUT. I
REMEMBER GOING TO VISIT A FRIEND
OF MINE AT THE AT THE OVER OVER
AT THE DORMS, AND I REMEMBER I
GOT JUMPED BY THREE OF MY FELLOW
COWORKERS, YOU KNOW, CALLING ME
ALL SORTS OF NAMES, BUT THOSE
ARE THE TYPE OF THINGS I CAN'T
TAKE AND REPORT BECAUSE IT WOULD
PUT A BIG A FLAG OUT THAT I'M A
HOMOSEXUAL. AND AT THE TIME I
HAD NO IDEA THEY KNEW. AND SO
ANYWAYS, ONCE I GOT KICKED OUT,
MY FATHER DIED SHORTLY AFTER
THAT, AND MY ENTIRE FAMILY
BLAMED ME FOR, FOR HIS DEATH. I
STRUGGLED VERY DIFFICULT TO GET
MY LIFE BACK ON TRACK,
EVENTUALLY, I LEARNED TO
SELF-MEDICATE THROUGH DRUGS. AND
THEN I WAS EVENTUALLY HOMELESS
ON THE STREET FOR MANY YEARS. IT
WASN'T UNTIL ABOUT SIX AND A
HALF YEARS AGO THAT I DECIDED TO
REACH OUT TO THE VA. THE VA WAS
THE LAST HOUSE ON THE BLOCK FOR
ME, RIGHT? SO THE LAST HOUSE ON
THE BLOCK FOR ME. BUT I WAS ABLE
TO COME OUT TO WEST LA AND I AND
GET THE HELP THAT I NEEDED. AND
IT, YOU KNOW, TO GET MY LIFE
BACK ON TRACK SOMEWHAT. SO ONE
THING I WANT TO DO, I WANT TO
APPLY FOR AN UPGRADE IN MY
DISCHARGE AND I GOT DENIED THE
FIRST TIME. AND THEN I SOUGHT
LEGAL REPRESENTATION. AND THEY
SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? A GENERAL
DISCHARGE IS AS HIGH AS YOU'RE
GOING TO GET, ESPECIALLY SINCE
YOU'RE IN THE AIR FORCE. THEY
DON'T LIKE TO UPGRADE IT TO AN
HONORABLE DISCHARGE. AND SO I
GAVE UP, YOU KNOW, SO MANY OF MY
SO MANY OF MY FELLOW, SO MANY OF
MY FELLOW, MY FELLOW TROOPS, YOU
KNOW, THEY, THEY SACRIFICED SO
MUCH FOR THEIR COUNTRY, AND
THEIR COUNTRY TURNED THEIR BACKS
ON THEM. AND I REALLY SUPPORT
SCR SIX, AND I HOPE YOU DO AS
WELL. IN THE INTEREST OF THE
TIME ALLOTTED, I WANT TO THANK
YOU BOTH FOR YOUR SERVICE AND,
IT IS HIGH TIME THAT WE BROUGHT
THIS FORWARD BECAUSE THE NATION
NEEDS TO KNOW THE SERVICE YOU'VE
PROVIDED TO ALL OF US. AND IF
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUALITY AND
FAIRNESS AND TO JUDGE EVERYONE
ON THEIR PERFORMANCE, THIS IS
WHAT IT SHOULD BE ALL ABOUT, SO
WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT
UP TO MY COMMITTEE MEMBERS IF
YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS, SUPPORT MY POSITION.
LET ME CORRECT ANY, ANYONE HERE
ON SUPPORT OF THE BILL? SJ R
SIX, PLEASE. THE MICROPHONE IS
OPEN. GREG PULSIFER, ON BEHALF
OF EQUALITY CALIFORNIA AND
STRONG SUPPORT. HELLO. MY NAME
IS JOE ENGEL. I'M A VETERAN,
SERVICE CONNECTED DISABLED
VETERAN. I'VE BEEN IN CALIFORNIA
RESIDENTS SINCE 2000. AFTER
SERVING SIX YEARS OF ACTIVE DUTY
IN THE US NAVY FROM 94 UNTIL 99,
THERE WAS HONORABLY DISCHARGED
AND AWARDED THE JOINT SERVICE
ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL FOR MY
OUTSTANDING WORK AS A NAVY
LINGUIST THE YEAR PRIOR. I JUST
COME OUT AS A GAY MAN AT THE AGE
OF 23, WHICH WAS COINCIDENTALLY
THE YEAR I SIGNED MY NAVY
CONTRACT. AS A VETERAN WHO HELPS
OTHER VETERANS IN MY
PROFESSIONAL AND PRIVATE LIVES,
I'VE ENCOURAGED THEM TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF ALL THE VETERANS
BENEFITS THEY HAVE EARNED.
UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO DON'T ASK,
DON'T TELL IT'S AND ITS
PREDECESSOR POLICY, SOME OF MY
QUEER FRIENDS WERE SEPARATED DUE
TO THEIR ASK YOU TO GO AHEAD AND
CLOSE UP SO WE CAN GET OTHERS
UP. OH, I SEE, OKAY. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ANYONE
ELSE IN SUPPORT? SER SIX. YOU'RE
WELCOME TO THE MICROPHONE.
LET'S. ANYONE ELSE IN? ANYONE IN
OPPOSITION, PLEASE. THE
MICROPHONE IS OPEN. I SEE NO ONE
ELSE NOW. WE'LL BRING IT OVER TO
OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS. COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. AND THANK YOU, SENATOR
CABALLERO. VERY IMPORTANT
MEASURE. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
IT FORWARD. THANKS TO BOTH OF
YOU. THANK YOU, CAPTAIN WADE,
FOR YOUR ADVOCACY, BECAUSE YOU
ADVOCATE FOR EQUALITY IN PLACES
THAT ARE MORE CHALLENGING EVEN
THAN SACRAMENTO. SO WE
APPRECIATE THAT, AND WITH THAT,
THE APPROPRIATE TIME, I'LL MOVE
THE BILL. THANK YOU, SENATOR
MENGIBAR, I WOULD LOVE TO MOVE
THE BILL. THE I WITHDRAW MY
MOTION. VETERAN DO YOU HAVE ANY
COMMENTS? NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
YOU KNOW, I, I CAN'T EVEN
IMAGINE IF I WOULD HAVE DONE MY
ENTIRE TENURE IN THE MARINE
CORPS ALL UNDER DON'T ASK, DON'T
TELL. I ONLY DID ABOUT TWO AND A
HALF YEARS UNDER DON'T ASK,
DON'T TELL. AND I REMEMBER THE
MOMENT THAT IT GOT REPEALED AND
I WENT TO THE MARINE CORPS BALL,
AND I GOT A LITTLE BIT OF LIQUID
COURAGE TO COME OUT TO MY ENTIRE
UNIT, AND I LIKE NOT A LOT OF MY
PEERS HAD A POSITIVE, RESPONSE
FROM MY SERGEANT AT THAT TIME
WHO FOREVER BE ENGRAVED IN MY
MEMORY AS SOMEONE WHO HELPED
PAVE, MY, EXPERIENCE. AND THE
MOMENT HE WAS, THE MOMENT HE
RESPONDED, THE WAY HE DID,
EVERYONE ELSE FOLLOWED SUIT, BUT
I REMEMBER HOW IT WAS BEFORE
DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL WAS
REPEALED, AND HOW I WAS SO
SCARED OF COMING OUT BECAUSE
WHAT I SAW, WHAT WAS HAPPENING
TO OTHERS THAT WERE OUTED AND
HOW THEY WERE BEING TREATED. SO
I'M REALLY THANKFUL, SENATOR
CABALLERO, FOR YOU BRINGING THIS
SUCH IMPORTANT LEGISLATION
BECAUSE IT MEANS THE WORLD TO SO
MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO DECIDED TO
PUT ON A UNIFORM AND DEFEND A
COUNTRY THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THERE
DEFENDING THEM. SO THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON
THAT. SO IF THE SENATOR
ELLENBERG WILL ALLOW ME, I WILL
MOVE THIS BILL ON MY MOTION.
OKAY SENATOR, THE MOTION IS
YOURS. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS. LET ME GO AHEAD AND
ADD A LITTLE BIT, TO MINE, AS
YOU KNOW, I HAVE TWO SONS ON
ACTIVE DUTY. ONE'S A MAJOR AND
ONE'S A LIEUTENANT COLONEL. AND
AS THEY'VE GROWN THROUGH THE
RANKS, I TOLD THEM FAIRNESS,
EQUALITY ACROSS THE BOARD. NO
MATTER WHERE YOU ARE, THE PERSON
NEXT TO YOU. LET ME EMPHASIZE,
THE PERSON NEXT TO YOU MIGHT
SAVE YOUR LIFE. YOU HAVE THE
RESPONSIBILITY TO SAVE THEIR
LIVES. AND AS LEADERS, YOU HAVE
TO EMPHASIZE THAT EVERYONE HAS
GOT TO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT OF
OUR MILITARY IS TO SERVE OUR
COUNTRY EQUALLY AND FAIRLY. AND
I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING,
AND YOU CERTAINLY HAVE MY VOTE.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP
FOR THE VOTES. YES. STAR SIX
MOTION IS TO BE ADOPTED.
ARCHULETA I ARCHULETA I GROVE
ALVARADO. GIL I ALVARADO. GIL I
MENGIBAR MENGIBAR I UMBERG I
UMBERG I OKAY, WE'LL HOLD IT
OPEN FOR THE OTHER. THANK YOU,
SENATOR, FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. ENTERED
MENGIBAR I BELIEVE YOU'RE UP AND
YOU'LL FINISH IT UP
.
WELCOME. SENATOR MENGIBAR. AND I
UNDERSTAND YOU'RE PRESENTING
SENATE BILL 1124, AND YOU HAVE
THE FLOOR. WELCOME THANK YOU SO
MUCH. MUCH, MR. CHAIR AND
FELLOW. COMMITTEE MEMBERS. YES,
I'M HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU ON SB
1124, A BILL THAT IS LOOKING TO
ENSURE THAT VETERANS, AFTER THEY
COMMIT THEIR TIME IN THE SERVICE
, WHO ARE SEEKING COMPENSATION,
DISABILITY PAYMENTS FOR THE
LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS THAT WE
EXPERIENCE IN THE MILITARY HAVE
ACCESS TO THAT WITHOUT HAVING TO
GET AT SOME TIMES, HAVE FRAUD
DONE AGAINST THEM. LIES AGAINST
THEM. WHEN SEEKING COMPENSATION
FOR DISABILITY RIGHTS. THE
PROCESS RIGHT NOW IS WHEN YOU
GET OUT OF THE MILITARY, YOU CAN
APPLY FOR VETERAN BENEFITS AND
YOU GET RATED DEPENDING ON WHAT,
SYMPTOM, WHAT INJURY, WHAT,
ILLNESS YOU HAVE. THEN THE VA,
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MAKES A
DECISION HOW YOU GET RATED ON
THAT AT TIMES AT MOST TIMES THIS
PROCESS CAN BE VERY DAUNTING AND
VULNERABLE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO
PRESENT ALL THE THINGS THAT
POTENTIALLY ARE IMPACTING YOU
BOTH PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY AND
SUCH, PSYCHOLOGICALLY, AND HAVE
PROOF. AND AT TIMES YOU MAY NOT
HAVE PROOF BECAUSE WHILE IN THE
MILITARY OR YOU WERE GIVEN WAS
MOTRIN AND A WARM PAIR OF SOCKS
TO TREAT EVERY SINGLE THING THAT
WAS WRONG WITH YOU, SO YOU CAN
IMAGINE THAT THE VA AT TIMES
WHEN THE VA COMES BACK WITH YOUR
RATING AND IT'S WAY LESS THAN
WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU SHOULD GET,
YOU COULD FEEL EVEN MORE
DISCOURAGED TO CONTINUE IN THE
PROCESS, AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS,
YOU HAVE SOME COMPANIES THAT
STEP FORWARD WHO ARE THE KNIGHT
IN SHINING ARMORS, WHO SAY THAT
THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU GET
YOU THE RATING, THE HIGHEST
RATING YOU CAN MAYBE GET YOU ALL
THE WAY UP TO 100. AND AT TIMES,
NOT ALL THE TIMES OF THOSE
COMPANIES ARE NOT FULFILLING
WHAT THEY'RE TELLING THE
VETERANS. AND WE HAVE A LOT OF
CASES WHERE EVEN CONGRESS IS
LOOKING IS HEARING ON CASES
WHERE VETERANS ARE FALLING INTO,
AGAIN, FRAUD, WHERE THERE ARE
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF FRAUD
CASES, PAYMENTS THAT VETERANS
HAVE TO COME OUT OUT OF POCKET
WHEN THESE COMPANIES ARE AT
TIMES NOT EVEN HELPING THEM. I
WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT NOT ALL
COMPANIES ARE THE SAME, BECAUSE
I MYSELF UTILIZED A PRIVATE
COMPANY WHEN I NEEDED EXTRA
SUPPORT AND I HAD A POSITIVE
EXPERIENCE, AND I WAS ABLE TO
GET TO THE RATING THAT I FELT
WAS APPROPRIATE FOR MYSELF, FOR
ME, AND IT WAS HELPFUL TO GO
THROUGH THAT PATH, I REALLY WANT
TO MAKE THAT CLEAR BECAUSE IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT THAT, WE HAVE
THOSE KIND OF OPTIONS FOR OUR
VETERANS NOW IN ORDER TO
MAINTAIN THAT OPTION, WE NEED
INDIVIDUALS, ENTITIES TO BE
ACCREDITED UNDER THE VA
ACCREDITATION SYSTEM RIGHT NOW.
AND IT'S POSSIBLE. IT'S POSSIBLE
TO BE ACCREDITED AND THEN TO BE
ABLE TO ASSIST VETERANS WITH
APPEALS SHOULD THE FIRST RATING
NOT WORK. EVERYTHING. MY BILL IS
DOING IS ALIGNING WITH FEDERAL
LAW. IT'S BEEN VERY DIFFICULT IN
THE PROCESS LEADING UP TO THIS
POINT TO TAKE ANY AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE IT WOULD GO AGAINST
FEDERAL LAW. I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT OUR VETERANS ARE PROTECTED.
THERE ARE FREE SERVICES, BUT
BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL THINGS
THAT ARE BEING ADD ON, AS
ELIGIBLE AS AS BEING ELIGIBLE,
ELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS. SOMETIMES
OUR VSOS ARE AT CAPACITY. SO WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE OTHER
COMPANIES ARE AVAILABLE THERE
TO, SUPPLEMENT THAT, THAT
ASSISTANCE OR THAT AVAILABILITY,
AS LONG AS THEY BECOME
ACCREDITED, WE NEED THEM TO BE
ACCREDITED. AND I'LL CLOSE WITH
THIS IS BECAUSE WE NEED
OVERSIGHT OVER THEM. WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT,
THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR A FEE
THAT IS BEYOND, ASTRONOMICAL.
AND WHAT COMPARED TO THE
BENEFITS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO
GET? WE NEED TO HAVE OVERSIGHT
TO ENSURE THAT THE UNACCREDITED
AGENTS ARE FOLLOWING THROUGH ON
THEIR CONTRACTS AND PROMISES,
AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE VETERANS HAVE A SMOOTH
PROCESS TO THEIR RIGHTS OF
VETERAN BENEFITS. SO MR. CHAIR,
WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO TURN TO
TWO GENTLEMEN WHO ARE HERE TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
GO RIGHT AHEAD. CHAIRMAN.
ESTEEMED COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MY
NAME IS ROGER MEYER. I REPRESENT
APPROXIMATELY 55,000 VFW MEMBERS
OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE VFW.
TRACES ITS ROOTS BACK TO 1899,
WHEN A GROUP OF VETERANS FROM
THE SPANISH AMERICAN WAR AND THE
PHILIPPINE INSURRECTION BAND
TOGETHER TO ADVOCATE FOR
VETERANS MEDICAL AND PENSION
BENEFIT. S TODAY, THE VFW IN
CALIFORNIA REPRESENTS
APPROXIMATELY 70,000 VETERANS
AND THEIR FAMILIES. THIS FREE
ASSISTANCE HAS RESULTED IN
APPROXIMATELY $370 MILLION IN
COMPENSATION IN THE FIRST FIVE
MONTHS OF THIS FISCAL YEAR.
COMPENSATION THAT HAS REMAINED
WITH THE VETERAN IN CALIFORNIA,
NOT A PORTION GOING TO A
BUSINESS IN NORTH CAROLINA,
DELAWARE OR SOME OTHER STATE.
BUT THE VFW IS NOT THE ONLY
ORGANIZATION WITH ACCREDITED
STAFF WHO PROVIDE FREE VA CLAIMS
ASSISTANCE. CALIFORNIA IS
SLIGHTLY UNIQUE IN THAT BESIDES
HAVING OTHER VETERAN SERVICE
ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE AMERICAN
LEGION, THE DISABLED AMERICAN
VETERANS, THE STATE FUNDS HIGHLY
TRAINED COUNTY VETERANS SERVICE
OFFICERS. CALIFORNIA BOASTS 1019
ACCREDITED ATTORNEYS, CLAIMS
AGENTS, AND VSO REPRESENTATIVES
TO ASSIST WITH CLAIMS. YOU MAY
HEAR ALLEGATIONS OF A BROKEN VA
SYSTEM. THESE CLAIMS
REPRESENTATIVES ARE NOT PART OF
THE VA SYSTEM. UNACCREDITED
CLAIMS CONSULTANTS CONTINUE TO
OPERATE OUTSIDE THE LAW BECAUSE
THEY DO NOT WANT TO BECOME
ACCREDITED. TO BE CLEAR, THERE
IS NOTHING STOPPING THEM FROM
HAVING THEIR EMPLOYEES
ACCREDITED TODAY. THESE
COMPANIES MAKE EXCUSES THAT IT
WOULD BE TOO HARD TO GET EVERY
INDIVIDUAL ACCREDITED. DON'T
BELIEVE THAT ATTORNEYS ARE
ADMITTED TO THE BAR, NOT LAW
FIRMS. DOCTORS HAVE A MEDICAL
LICENSE, NOT THE HOSPITAL. THE
VFW IS NOT ACCREDITED, BUT OUR
SERVICE OFFICERS ARE THESE
UNACCREDITED CLAIMS COMPANIES
SHOULD BE HELD TO THE SAME
STANDARD AND NOT ALLOWED A FREE
PASS SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE
IT'S TOO HARD. IT SHOULD NOT
MATTER WHETHER THEIR CLIENTS
WILLINGLY CHOOSE TO USE THOSE
SERVICES. IT SHOULD NOT MATTER
THAT SOME OF THEIR CLIENTS ARE
SATISFIED WITH RESULTS OF THESE
UNACCREDITED COMPANIES. WE DO
NOT LEGISLATE BASED ON YELP
REVIEWS. COMPANIES OPERATING
OUTSIDE THE LAW MUST BE REINED
IN. IT SHOULD BE OUR RESPONSIBLE
K¾T TO REQUIRE ANYONE WHO
HANDLES A VETERANS CLAIM AND ALL
THEIR PERSONAL MEDICAL
INFORMATION BE ACCREDITED AND
FOLLOW FEDERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES AND LAWS. NO MATTER.
I'M SORRY. LET ME INTERRUPT
BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A SECOND
WITNESS HERE. I'D LIKE TO HEAR
FROM HIM, THE INTEREST OF TIME.
YES. YES, SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON,
MR. CHAIR. AND ESTEEMED MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
SCOTT HOLLOWELL. I REPRESENT THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY
VETERANS SERVICE OFFICERS AS THE
LEGISLATIVE CHAIR. I AM A PAST
PRESIDENT OF THAT ORGANIZATION,
AND I'M ALSO A 30 YEAR NAVY
VETERAN. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE THE STORY
OF A VETERAN WHO HAS BEEN
NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY HIS
INVOLVEMENT WITH AN UNACCREDITED
CLAIMS AGENT. THE VETERAN WISHES
TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS DUE TO FEAR
OF RETALIATION. THE VETERAN WAS
ASSISTED BY RODOLFO PINEIRO, AN
UNACCREDITED CLAIMS AGENT ALSO
KNOWN AS PINEIRO FAMILY
CONSULTING. OUR CLIENT IS A
COMBAT VETERAN WHO SERVED
HONORABLY IN BOTH AFGHANISTAN
AND IRAQ. HE FILED A CLAIM FOR
SERVICE CONNECTED DISABILITY
WITH THE US DEPARTMENT OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS, UTILIZING THE
SERVICES OF RUDOLFO PINEIRO, AN
UNACCREDITED CLAIMS AGENT WHO
DID IN FACT CHARGE A SUBSTANTIAL
FEE. THIS VETERAN SERVED DURING
FOUR DISTINCT ENLISTMENT PERIODS
, THE FIRST THREE UNDER
HONORABLE CONDITIONS WHICH, WITH
THE FINAL BEING CHARACTERIZED
UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE
CONDITIONS WHEN HE FILED THE
CLAIM, IT WAS FOR MULTIPLE
CONDITIONS THAT ARE CONSIDERED
RELATED TO THE FIRST GULF WAR,
WHEN THE VA CLAIMS PAPERWORK
SUBMITTED THE VA CLAIMS WERE
SUBMITTED BY MR. PINEIRO CONTAIN
NO MENTION OF THE DATES WHEN THE
VETERAN'S CONDITIONS BEGAN OR
WORSENED. THE CHARACTERIZATION
OF DISCHARGES PREVIOUSLY
MENTIONED ARE VITAL, AS THE VA,
BY LAW, MUST MAKE A
CHARACTERIZATION OF DISCHARGE
DETERMINATION REGARDING THE
PERIOD OF OTHER THAN HONORABLE
SERVICE, WHICH THEY HAD
PREVIOUSLY DONE. HOWEVER WHEN
MR. PINEIRO HELPED FILE THE
CLAIM, HIS FAILURE TO INCLUDE
THE DATES WHEN THE CONDITIONS
AROSE TRIGGERED THE VA TO
REDETERMINE THE VETERANS
DISCHARGE. CHARACTERIZATION
CAUSING HIM ADDED STRESS AND
ADDITIONALLY ADDED SIGNIFICANT
TIME TO THE CLAIMS ADJUDICATION
PROCESS. VETERANS SEEKING
BENEFITS SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECTED
TO THIS KIND OF TREATMENT. AFTER
FILING THE CLAIM ON BEHALF OF
THE VETERAN, IT WAS DISCOVERED
BY THE VETERAN THAT MR. PINEIRO
HAD PROVIDED NO SPECIFIC DETAILS
TO THE VA OR EVIDENCE REGARDING
HIS CONDITIONS OR PERIODS OF
SERVICE. IT WAS DUE TO THIS
EGREGIOUS ERROR DURING THE
FILING PROCESS THAT THE VA
INITIATED THE AFOREMENTIONED
REDETERMINATION OF CHARACTER OF,
OR THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THE
VETERANS MULTIPLE DISCHARGES.
AGAIN AN EVOLUTION PREVIOUSLY
PERFORMED BY THE VA ENSURING THE
INTEREST OF TIME. WOULD YOU
CLOSE? I WILL THANK YOU DURING
THE JOURNEY OF ASSISTING THIS
VETERAN TO DETANGLE HIS HORRIBLY
CONVOLUTED SITUATION, THE
VETERAN STATED HE WAS NOT
PREVIOUSLY AWARE OF THE
INEXCUSABLE MISTAKES MADE BY MR.
PINEIRO WERE NOW CAUSING THE VA
TO ESSENTIALLY RECONSIDER
WHETHER HIS SERVICE PERIODS
ENTITLED HIM TO BENEFITS. HE
CAME TO OUR OFFICE AND THE KINGS
COUNTY VETERANS SERVICES OFFICE.
WE HELPED THIS VETERAN TO
DETANGLE THIS SITUATION AND THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY
VETERANS SERVICE OFFICERS
STRONGLY ASKS FOR YOUR VOTE IN
FAVOR OF SB 1124. THANK YOU SIR.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE, IN THE
ROOM THAT IS IN SUPPORT? THE
MICROPHONE IS OPEN. PLEASE STATE
YOUR NAME AND, THAT YOU APPROVE
OR DISAPPROVE THAT YOU APPROVE.
I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS SETH REEB WITH REEB
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS. DISABLED
VETERAN WITH THE US ARMY,
REPRESENTING AMERICAN LEGION.
DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA,
AMVETS, DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA
, CALIFORNIA STATE COMMANDERS,
VETERANS COUNCIL, MILITARY
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA,
CALIFORNIA COUNCIL OF CHAPTERS
IN THE VIETNAM VETERANS OF
AMERICA, CALIFORNIA STATE
COUNCIL, ALL IN SUPPORT AND
ABOUT ROUGHLY A HALF A MILLION
VETERANS. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MARCHESE, ON BEHALF
OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M ANTHONY LIU
WITH THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY
GENERAL ROB BONTA. WE ARE IN THE
CO-SPONSOR OF THIS BILL. WE
THANK THE AUTHOR AND OUR CO
SPONSORS, VFW, AND URGE YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEMBERS.
TANISHA BOATNER, ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
OF COUNTIES IN SUPPORT OF SB
1124. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. SENATE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, DAVID CUDA, US ARMY
VETERAN, DISABLED VETERAN,
REPRESENTING VFW AS WELL. AND I
SUPPORT THIS BOAT. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. DANITA
STROMGREN, VOLUNTEER WITH
CALIFORNIA AARP ON BEHALF OF THE
3.2 MILLION MEMBERS IN
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT OF SB
1124. THANK YOU. DAVID WEST,
PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY VETERANS
SERVICES OFFICERS AND NEVADA
COUNTY VETERANS SERVICES
OFFICER, IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. RETIRED COMMAND
SERGEANT MAJOR MAC ADAMS. I'M
REPRESENTING THE VFW IN
PLACERVILLE AND THE MILITARY
FAMILY SUPPORT. I STRONGLY
SUPPORT THIS BILL. 1120. THANK
YOU. ALL THE WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT. NOW, I'D LIKE TO ASK
FOR A LEAD WITNESS IN OPPOSITION
. ANYONE? OKAY WHY DON'T YOU
HOLD THOSE SPOTS RIGHT THERE FOR
NOW. YOU WANT TO TESTIFY FROM
THERE, MAKE IT EASIER. GO RIGHT
AHEAD. THANK YOU. CHAIR, MY NAME
IS DINATO CLAY. I'M THE COO OF
VETERAN BENEFITS GUIDE. I'M A
CALIFORNIA ARMY. ARMY NATIONAL
GUARD VETERAN AND A DISABLED
VETERAN HERE TO OPPOSE UNLESS
AMENDED, BUT WILL SUPPORT IF
AMENDED BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT
CALIFORNIA CAN TAKE THE LEAD ON
CREATING PROTECTIONS FOR
VETERANS WITHOUT THE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE OF PREVENTING
VETERANS FROM BEING SERVED OR TO
OF PREVENTING VETERANS FROM
BEING SERVICED BY MODERN
COMPANIES WHO APPLY INNOVATIVE
SOLUTIONS SUCH AS TRAINING
PROVIDERS, TO PERFORM DISABILITY
EXAMS THAT ARE OBJECTIVE AND
LEAD TO MORE VETERANS RECEIVING
THE ACCURATE RATINGS THEY
DESERVE. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY
THAT VBG CANNOT BECOME
ACCREDITED AND STILL PERFORM THE
SERVICE THAT WE DO, AND THAT'S
WHY WE'RE SEEKING ACCREDITATION
REFORM AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, SO
IF THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO US,
EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE AT VBG
WOULD BE ACCREDITED. SO I JUST
WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. WE HAVE
NO OPPOSITION TO THE PROCESS OF
ACCREDITATION. WE JUST CANNOT BE
ACCREDITED AND PERFORM OUR
SERVICE, I DO HAVE SOME
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION THAT
HIGHLIGHTS SOME PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO
SHARE. IF THERE'S A SERGEANT
AVAILABLE. THAT I THINK
HIGHLIGHT THAT WE ARE ABLE TO
STILL PROVIDE, THAT CALIFORNIA
WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS FOR
VETERANS, AS WELL AS ALLOW FOR
PROFIT COMPANIES THAT ARE
INNOVATIVE IN THIS SPACE TO DO
WHAT WE NEED TO DO. AND SO I'D
LIKE TO YIELD THE REST OF MY
TIME TO VETERAN, KELSEY GREEN.
AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS
IF NEEDED. ALL RIGHT. AHEAD GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS KELSEY
GREEN. I SERVED IN THE UNITED
STATES COAST GUARD FOR TEN YEARS
AS AN AIRCRAFT MECHANIC AND A
H60 CREW CHIEF. WHEN I GOT OUT
OF THE MILITARY, I APPLIED FOR
VA DISABILITY ON MY OWN. IT WAS,
TOOK TWO INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATING
YEARS. MUCH VOEPEL, FOUR PLUS
HOUR CAR RIDES TO SEE DOCTORS
THAT REALLY DIDN'T SEEM TO CARE
ABOUT ME, TO EVENTUALLY GET A
10% RATING. IT WAS A TERRIBLE
EXPERIENCE, I'VE HAD OTHER
VETERAN FRIENDS SAY, HEY, YOU
SHOULD PROBABLY APPEAL THIS. AND
I JUST REMEMBER THAT WHOLE
PROCESS AND I'M LIKE, I'M NEVER
DOING THAT AGAIN, EVENTUALLY,
WITH THE HELP OF VBG, I WAS ABLE
TO APPEAL MY DISABILITY CLAIM
AND IT WENT FROM 10% TO 60,
WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE.
AND THAT TOOK TWO MONTHS. AND I
GOT TO DEAL WITH SOME DOCTORS
THAT WERE FANTASTIC. I FELT
CARED FOR AND I HIGHLY RECOMMEND
THE SERVICE. THANK YOU. LET ME
BRING UP YOUR THIRD ONE,
CHAIRMAN ARCHULETA, MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY IN
OPPOSITION OF SB 1124, UNLESS
AMENDED. MY NAME IS LIEUTENANT
COLONEL RETIRED BILL TAYLOR. I
WAS IN THE ARMY FOR 23 YEARS,
AND AFTER I RETIRED, I FOUNDED
VETERANS GUARDIAN. WE ARE
VETERAN OWNED, VETERAN OPERATED
WITH OVER 200 EMPLOYEES WHO ARE
VETERANS, SPOUSES, VETERANS, AND
SPOUSES OF ACTIVE DUTY. WE ARE
TRANSPARENT AND ETHICAL COMPANY
HELPING ENSURE VETERANS RECEIVE
THE BENEFITS THEY ARE ENTITLED
TO BASED ON THEIR HONORABLE
SERVICE TO THE NATION. WE HELPED
ALMOST 25,000 VETERANS LAST YEAR
AND TO DATE HAVE HELPED OVER
4000 VETERANS IN CALIFORNIA WITH
AN ADDITIONAL 800 OR SO THAT ARE
PENDING A DECISION, WITH AN
AVERAGE OF 85 DAYS, FOR A
DECISION IN A 90% SUCCESS RATE.
WE ARE AHEAD AND CLOSE BECAUSE I
GAVE YOU THREE OF YOU. OH, I
APOLOGIZE, THE ONLY THING I'D
LIKE TO CLOSE WITH IS THAT, WE
ARE NOT OPERATING ILLEGALLY. WE
ARE OPERATING IN COMPLIANCE WITH
FEDERAL LAW AS IT'S CURRENTLY
WRITTEN, NOT AS SOME OF OUR
OPPONENTS WISH IT TO BE WRITTEN
AND AS IT'S GOING TO BE, IF
OTHER LEGISLATIONS WERE PASSED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND WE'LL
CONSIDER THOSE YOUR, LEAD
WITNESSES, THREE OF THEM. ANYONE
ELSE IN THE ROOM IN OPPOSITION?
I'VE SEEN NO OTHERS. ALL RIGHT,
LET ME GO AHEAD AND HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. YES, SENATOR. THANK
YOU. CHAIR, THANK. MY
MICROPHONE'S ON, I HAVE A COUPLE
QUESTIONS. SO, I ON ON THIS
COMMITTEE, I REPRESENT VETERAN
FAMILIES, HAVING, A EX-HUSBAND
THAT WAS A VETERAN OF THE ARMY
AND BEING A PRIMARY CAREGIVER TO
HIM THROUGH HIS, VERY DIFFICULT
DISABILITY. AT THE SAME TIME,
HAVING A CHILD THAT WAS TWO
YEARS OLD, AND HAVING TO NOT
ONLY BE A CAREGIVER, BUT TO HELP
NAVIGATE THROUGH A VERY
CUMBERSOME, VA BENEFITS PROCESS
AND NOT BEING A VETERAN, NOT
KNOWING THE INTRICACIES, BUT
HAVING TO BOTH CARE FOR MY CHILD
AND FOR MY AILING HUSBAND AT
THAT TIME, I FOUND THE PROCESS
VERY DIFFICULT, AND I WAS EVEN
TOLD POINT BLANK THAT THE SYSTEM
IS SET UP TO NAVIGATE THROUGH
APPEALS THAT IT IS NOT SET UP TO
HELP VETERANS, MAKE ENDS MEET,
FEED THEIR FAMILIES, TAKE CARE
OF THEIR KIDS, PAY THEIR RENT,
AND I BECAME, VERY SOUR TOWARDS
THE, THE WAY THAT WE TREAT OUR
VETERANS, HERE IN THE US, BEING
THAT THE SACRIFICES THAT THEY
MAKE, NOT ONLY THEIR PERSONAL
SACRIFICES, BUT TO THEIR FAMILY
AND THEIR CHILDREN AND THEIR
COMMUNITY, THAT THE VERY LEAST
WE CAN DO IS TO ENSURE THAT
THOSE WHO ARE INJURED AND AILING
ARE CARED FOR. SO WHEN I LOOKED
AT THIS BILL, I, I SEE THE
INTENT OF THE BILL OF WANTING TO
MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE NOT BAD
ACTORS, BUT WITHOUT THOSE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT
DIRECTLY TIED TO THE, FEDERAL
MACHINE OF, OF VA, INTERVENTIONS
AND COUNSELING, I'M CONCERNED
THAT THE GOOD ACTORS, THOSE
ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS
THAT REALLY HELPED, PARTICULARLY
MY FAMILY, GET OVER THOSE
HURDLES. AND WHAT I'M HEARING
FROM SOME OF THE, THE OPPOSITION
AS WELL, THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO
AWAY WITH THOSE GOOD ACTORS AND
WOULD LIMIT THE ABILITY OF OUR
VETERANS AND THEIR FAMILIES TO
CHOOSE, EITHER A PERSON OR AN
ORGANIZATION THAT IS TRULY HAS
THEIR INTERESTS AT HEART. SO CAN
YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO HOW
THIS BILL IS GOING TO HELP TO
PROTECT THAT CHOICE AND FREEDOM
OF OUR VETERANS, RATHER THAN
CONSTRICT THEM INTO A SYSTEM
THAT IS ALREADY FLAWED? RIGHT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, SENATOR, FOR
THAT QUESTION, AND IT'S A
CONCERN THAT A LOT OF US HAVE
RIGHT? I MEAN, I, I'M, I CAN SAY
THAT I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF
REFORM, REFORM THAT NEEDS TO
HAPPEN ON THE FEDERAL SIDE.
THAT'S NOT REFORM THAT WE CAN DO
HERE IN CALIFORNIA, BECAUSE
WHETHER IT'S AN ACCREDITED AGENT
OR AN UNACCREDITED AGENT, ALL
THE FILES OR THE ALL THE
APPLICATIONS GO THROUGH THE SAME
PORTAL. SO WHETHER YOU GO TO THE
VSO, WHETHER YOUR MOM DOES IT
FOR YOU, WHETHER YOU GO TO AN
UNCREDITED AGENT, NO ONE GETS
PRIORITY ON, LOOK AT MY
APPLICATION FIRST OR NO ONE GETS
PRIORITY ON ANY OF THAT. IT ALL
GETS FUNNELED INTO THE SAME
STATE AND TO THE SAME PLACE, AND
THEN IT'S OUT OF OUR HANDS
BECAUSE IT'S THE VA, THE FEDERAL
APPROACH. RIGHT? SO IF A VETERAN
GETS AN APPEAL, I MEAN, IF A
VETERAN GETS A LOW RATING AT 10%
AND THEY WISH TO APPEAL AN
ACCREDITED AGENT, THESE AGENTS
THAT YOU HEARD FROM CAN BE
ACCREDITED AND THEN THEY CAN
HELP WITH THE APPEAL. THEY CAN
STILL EXIST AS LONG AS THEY HELP
WITH THE APPEAL. RIGHT NOW,
FEDERAL LAW STATES THAT NO ONE
CAN CHARGE FOR AN INITIAL, AN
INITIAL FEE, NO ONE CAN CHARGE
FOR THE INITIAL APPLICATION, NO
ONE CAN DO THAT. NO ACCREDITED
OR UNACCREDITED FEDERALLY STATED
IN STATUTE RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE'RE
LOOKING TO DO IS MATCH FEDERAL
LAW AND IF A VETERAN GETS A LOW
RATING, WHO'S ACCREDITED VBG CAN
BE ACCREDITED, OR HAVE THEIR
INDIVIDUAL, THEIR EMPLOYEES
ACCREDITED AND THEN WORK ON THAT
APPEAL SO A VETERAN CAN STILL GO
TO THEM, WORK ON THAT APPEAL TO
GET A HIGHER RATING, SO WE STILL
WANT THESE SYSTEMS TO EXIST AS
LONG AS WE HAVE A WAY TO HAVE AN
OVERSIGHT OVER THEM TO ENSURE
THAT THEY'RE WORKING WITHIN,
FEDERAL AND THEN POTENTIALLY
STATE LAW. SO THIS, THIS PROCESS
OF ACCREDITATION, I WHAT I'M
HEARING FROM THE OPPOSITION IS
IF IT'S NOT THAT THEY DON'T WANT
TO BE ACCREDITED, BUT THAT THE
SERVICES THAT THEY ARE PROVIDING
THAT ARE BENEFITING VETERANS,
THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
PROVIDE AS AN ACCREDITED AGENT.
SO CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH THE
PROCESS OF ACCREDITATION AND HOW
THAT WOULD THE ONE OF ONE OF THE
BIGGEST THINGS WE'RE HEARING
FROM OPPOSITION IS THAT BECAUSE
ONCE YOU BECOME ACCREDITED, YOU
CANNOT CHARGE AN UP FEE FRONT
FOR THE INITIAL CLAIM FOR ALL
THE SERVICES CAN STILL BE DONE,
EXCEPT YOU CANNOT CHARGE FOR THE
FIRST INITIAL VETERAN BENEFIT
APPLICATION. SO THE OPPOSITION
AND WHICH IS THEIR RIGHT IS
CONCERNED THAT THEY CAN'T CHARGE
WHEN HELPING A VETERAN FOR THE
FIRST TIME THAT THAT VETERAN
APPLIES FOR VETERAN BENEFITS THE
TO BE ACCREDITED YOU DO THREE
STEPS. YOU COMPLETE A VA FORM
THE 21 DAY FORM. IT'S A VETERAN
ACCREDITATION FORM. YOU ATTACH
ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO THAT
AND THEN YOU SUBMIT YOUR FORM
AND ANY ATTACHMENTS. AND IT
TAKES FOR AN ATTORNEY, 60 TO 120
DAYS FOR ANYONE ELSE LOOKING TO
JUST BE A CLAIM AGENT
APPLICATION APPLICANT, IT TAKES
A YEAR, ABOUT APPROXIMATELY A
YEAR, TO PROCESS. SO
ESSENTIALLY, OPPOSITION COULD
SEND EVERY ONE OF THEIR CLAIM
AGENTS TO BE ACCREDITED
INDIVIDUALLY, AND IT WILL TAKE
APPROXIMATELY A YEAR. COULD
START THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE MY BILL WOULDN'T TAKE
INTO EFFECT UNTIL JANUARY, AND
BY JANUARY COULD HAVE EVERYBODY
ACCREDITED. BUT AGAIN, THEY
WOULD LOSE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
CHARGE AN INITIAL FEE AND CAN
ONLY CHARGE WHEN A VETERAN IS
CLAIM IS DOING AN APPEALS
PROCESS. THANK YOU FOR WALKING
ME THROUGH THAT. SO IF SOMEBODY
WANTS TO ENGAGE IN IN HELPING A
VETERAN NAVIGATE THROUGH THIS
DISABILITY PROCESS OR OTHER
BENEFITS, THEN, THEY MUST BE
ACCREDITED IN ORDER TO CHARGE AN
UPFRONT FEE. IS THAT CORRECT?
NO. YOU WHETHER YOU'RE
ACCREDITED, YOU CAN'T CHARGE AN
INITIAL FEE. YOU CANNOT. NO ONE
FEDERAL LAW SAYS YOU CANNOT
CHARGE AN INITIAL. AND THAT'S
FEDERAL LAW. YOU CAN'T CHARGE AN
ATTORNEY THAT TAKES ON A CASE
WOULD BE TAKING ON A CASE PRO
BONO FOR THE FIRST APPLICATION.
OKAY. SO I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR,
BECAUSE AN ATTORNEY CAN TAKE ON
A CASE AND IN ITS APPEAL CASE
AND THEY CAN CHARGE EVEN AND IF
IT'S AND LET ME REPHRASE THAT,
AN ATTORNEY CAN CHARGE A FEE FOR
SEEING A VETERAN FOR THE FIRST
TIME. IF THE VETERAN IS COMING
TO THEM TO HELP THEM WITH AN
APPEAL, EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE
FIRST TIME THEY'RE COMING TO THE
ATTORNEY, THEY CAN STILL CHARGE
THEM BECAUSE IT'S WORKING ON AN
APPEAL. THEY CAN CHARGE THEM.
IT'S THEY'RE WORKING ON THE
FIRST EVER APPLICATION THAT
VETERANS SUBMITS TO THE VA. SO
IF A VETERAN ON THEIR OWN
COMPLETES THE APPLICATION AND
SUBMITS IT AND GETS UNFAVORABLE
RESULTS, THEN THE FIRST, FIRST
APPLICATION IS ALREADY PUT IN.
SO NOW IF IT'S NOT IN THE APPEAL
STAGE AS OF YET, IT'S IN THAT
LIMBO DARK HOLE STAGE. AND I'M
SAYING THIS BECAUSE THIS IS
WHERE WHERE, I FELT I REALLY
STRUGGLED BECAUSE I HELPED MY,
MY SPOUSE WITH THE APPLICATION.
BEING A EDUCATED PERSON AND
THINKING THAT I COULD ANSWER
THIS, THE QUESTIONS. AND I HAD
ALL THE MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION
BECAUSE I HAD BEEN TAKING HIM TO
HIS DOCTOR'S VISITS. MY CONCERN
AT THAT POINT WAS, HOW AM I
GOING TO FEED THIS CHILD? HOW AM
I GOING TO KEEP A ROOF OVER OUR
HEAD BEING THAT, THAT I WAS THE
SINGLE BREAD WINNER AND
UNDERSTANDING THAT BECAUSE THE
DISABILITY FROM A MEDICAL
PERSPECTIVE WAS RELATED TO HIS
SERVICE, I NEEDED TO THEN
NAVIGATE THE SYSTEM TO BE ABLE
TO CONVINCE THE DECISION MAKERS.
SO IT WASN'T, IN IT WAS IN THAT
MIDDLE AREA. SO WHAT CAN ONE DO
IN CURRENT LAW IN THAT MIDDLE
AREA? MUST THEY GO TO SOMEONE
WHO'S ACCREDITED OR CAN THEY
CHOOSE TO GO TO SOMEONE WHO'S
NOT ACCREDITED AND STILL GET A
RESPONSE OR A SERVICE? I WANT TO
MAKE SURE. I HOPE, HOPEFULLY MY
ANSWER ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
YOUR QUESTION IS ONE IS ASKING
IF RIGHT NOW IF SOMEONE GETS AN
UNFAVORABLE RATING, WHAT DO THEY
DO RIGHT NOW? THEY CAN GO BACK.
IF THEY DID IT THEMSELVES, THEY
CAN GO TO A VSO COUNTY VSO AND
SEEK HELP WITH THE APPEAL. OR
THEY CAN GO SEEK RIGHT NOW, TO
PAY FOR ANYBODY TO HELP THEM
WITH THAT, THAT'S WHAT I DID.
AND WHEN I FIRST AND I GOT
DENIED, EVEN WHEN I PAID RIGHT
WHEN I PAID THE VA DENIED THE
REQUEST PUT TOGETHER BY AN
UNACCREDITED AGENT IN MY CASE.
SO WE HAD APPEAL AGAIN. SO
REGARDLESS OF WHO'S APPLYING,
WHETHER YOU PAY OR NOT, YOU
COULD BE GETTING THE SAME EXACT
DECISION WHETHER YOU'RE PAYING
FOR SOMETHING OR NOT. SO RIGHT
NOW, CURRENTLY, EVEN THOUGH
FEDERALLY THERE IS A STATUTE
THAT SAYS YOU CANNOT WORK AS AN
UNACCREDITED AGENT, FEDERALLY,
IT'S DIFFICULT TO HAVE OVERSIGHT
OVER ALL THAT. ANYONE CAN DECIDE
TO GO TO AN UNACCREDITED,
ACCREDITED INDIVIDUAL TO HELP
WITH THE SECOND APPEAL, WITH A
FIRST WITH AN APPEAL WITH AN
APPEAL, WITH AN APPEAL, WITH AN
APPEAL. OKAY, I THINK WE'RE
GETTING CLOSER TO ME
UNDERSTANDING THIS NAVIGATION,
IF AND I AND I WILL SAY THIS,
THIS APPLICATION FOR VETERANS
BENEFITS OR HAS IS MUCH MORE
COMPLICATED THAN FILING YOUR
TAXES. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY
THAT RIGHT NOW. AND IF FILING
YOUR TAXES IS ROUGH FOR THE
AVERAGE PERSON, YOU KNOW, I'M
LOOKING AT A, A PROGRAM OR A, A,
PROCESS THAT'S ALREADY FLAWED.
SO HOW IS THIS BILL HELPING TO
MAKE A PROCESS, TO STREAMLINE
THE PROCESS RATHER THAN TO
REMOVE, ACCESS POINTS? I'M STILL
NOT CLEAR THERE. UNFORTUNATELY,
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WE
DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION ON HOW
THE APPROACH FOR APPLICATIONS
FOR FEDERAL VETERAN BENEFITS
ARE. I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF
EFFORTS ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO
STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS.
SENATOR, THE ONLY THING MY BILL
IS LOOKING TO DO IS TO PREVENT
VETERANS FROM BEING CAUGHT IN
SITUATIONS THAT IS NO FAULT OF
THEIR OWN. LIKE THE STORY YOU
HEARD FROM THE OPPOSITION'S
HAVING TO PAY THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS FOR SOMETIMES A SERVICE
THAT ISN'T RENDERED TO THEM OR
THAT IS NOT COMPARABLE IS
EXORBITANT COMPARED TO THE
BENEFIT THAT THEY GET FROM THEIR
VETERAN BENEFITS. THE ONLY THING
I'M LOOKING TO DO TO DO IS TO
PREVENT ANY VETERAN FROM FALLING
INTO A FRAUD CASE, THERE ARE
VARIOUS, LITIGATION CASES
HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. A VETERAN
VERSUS XYZ COMPANY, ABC COMPANY,
BECAUSE THEY WERE WRONGED BY
THAT COMPANY. SO AGAIN, IF
ANYONE IN THIS ROOM EVER GETS TO
CONGRESS ON AN ELECTED OFFICIAL
POSITION AND THEY WISH TO CHANGE
THAT, THAT WOULD BE ON THAT
LEVEL. WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO
THAT HERE, MA'AM. SO CURRENTLY
THERE ARE REMEDIES FOR ANY
VETERAN WHO FEELS THEY'VE BEEN
WRONGED. SO IF THERE IS A,
SOMEONE WHO IS, HOLDS A, A
ACTIVE BAR IN CALIFORNIA AND
THEY ARE UNACCREDITED AND CHARGE
FOR AN APPEAL OR WHATEVER, THERE
IS A REMEDY TO BE ABLE TO, SEEK,
DAMAGES OR TO GRIEVE, FOR AN
ORGANIZATION. THERE'S A REMEDY
TO BE ABLE TO. ONE OF THE MAIN
PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE SEEING RIGHT
NOW IS THAT I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW
MANY YEARS AGO. AND, MR. CHAIR,
I'D LIKE TO TURN TO MY WITNESS
ON HELP ME ON THIS QUESTION, BUT
YOU, YEARS AGO, THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TOOK AWAY THE
PUNITIVE PART OF THE FEDERAL
STATUTE. SO RIGHT NOW, THERE IS
NO INCENTIVE TO BE ACCREDITED
BECAUSE THERE'S NO PUNITIVE
PORTION TO IT. SO THERE'S NO
FEES OR PENALTIES. YOU CAN GO
AFTER IN FEDERAL STATUTE, HERE,
WITH THIS BILL, WE'RE LOOKING TO
DO THAT IN CALIFORNIA. AND MR.
CHAIR, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I'D
LIKE TO TURN TO MY WITNESS TO
SEE I THINK YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE
IT. OKAY. YES, PLEASE. YES, BUT
SORRY, IT DOES HAVE TO GO
THROUGH THE CHAIR. I'LL. I
WASN'T IGNORING YOU. NO, NO,
THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I JUST I
WANTED TO I WOULD LIKE YOU TO GO
AHEAD AND ANSWER BECAUSE THERE'S
SO MANY QUESTIONS OUT THERE THAT
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE
COMMITTEE FEEL COMFORTABLE, AND
THE REASON FOR YOUR BILL,
SENATOR, THAT'S SO IMPORTANT.
SO, PLEASE, WITH YOUR WITNESS.
SO SO YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT
PROCESSING TIMES AND, THE,
UPDATE THAT I RECEIVED THIS PAST
WEEKEND WHEN I WAS IN KANSAS
CITY IS IT'S TAKING RIGHT NOW
THE VÀ ABOUT 4 TO 6 MONTHS TO DO
AN INITIAL CLAIM. NOW, THAT'S
NOT THE APPEAL PROCESS, BUT THE
INITIAL CLAIM PIECE TO GET THAT
FIRST RATING IS ABOUT 4 TO 6
MONTHS. SO THEY HAVE CAUGHT UP
FROM SOME OF THE BACKLOG FROM
THE PACT ACT. THE OTHER PIECE
IS, AS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
ACCREDITED VERSUS NON ACCREDITED
WORKING ON APPEALS. THE ONE
PIECE THAT ACCREDITED GIVES YOU
IS ACCESS TO THE VA'S MEDICAL
RECORDS ON THAT VETERAN, WHICH
MEANS WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSING
THAT APPEAL, YOU CAN SEE THE
REASON WHY THE VA MADE THE
DECISION THEY DID. IF YOU'RE
UNACCREDITED, YOU DON'T HAVE
THAT ACCESS. YOU THE VA DOESN'T
RECOGNIZE YOU AND THEY WILL NOT
GIVE YOU ACCESS TO THAT
INFORMATION. SO IT'S HARD TO DO
AN APPEAL WITHOUT HAVING ALL THE
INFORMATION. AND THAT'S WHY IT'S
IMPORTANT TO HAVE SOMEBODY
ACCREDITED WORK ON THAT FOR YOU.
SO, FOLLOW UP QUESTION. SO IN
THIS SITUATION AND AGAIN I'M
GOING TO USE SOME OF MY LIVED
EXPERIENCES. MY HUSBAND WAS
BEING CARED FOR THROUGH OUR
PRIVATE INSURANCE THAT HAD NOT
LAPSED YET BECAUSE OF, MY
EMPLOYMENT, SO HE WAS BEING SEEN
BY SPECIALISTS OUTSIDE OF THE VA
SYSTEM, AND HE WAS REDIRECTED TO
SEE PHYSICIANS IN THE VA SYSTEM
THAT DISAGREED WITH THE MEDICAL
RECORDS FROM THE SPECIALIST THAT
HAD BEEN TREATING HIM. HE WAS
BEING TREATED FOR NON-HODGKIN'S
LYMPHOMA THAT WAS DIRECTLY
CORRELATED WITH HIS SERVICE. AND
SO THE PROBLEM THAT I HAD AND
INITIALLY, I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT
THE TIME PERIODS HAVE CRUNCHED.
I WAS TOLD ORIGINALLY 1 TO 2
YEARS BEFORE WE EVEN GOT AN
ANSWER. AND AT THAT POINT, MY
CHILD'S FUTURE WAS IN IN PERIL.
SO THERE'S A DESPERATION THERE
AS WELL. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT
WHEN THERE'S A DESPERATION,
PARTICULARLY AROUND BASIC NEEDS,
FOOD, HOUSING, YOU KNOW, KEEPING
THE LIGHTS ON FOR YOUR FAMILY,
THAT THERE CAN BE PREDATORY BAD
ACTORS. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT
THERE IS, TO HAVE A OPPORTUNITY
TO CHOOSE, AN ENTITY OR A PERSON
OR AN ORGANIZATION OR A FAITH
BASED GROUP OR A NONPROFIT THAT
IS IN IT FOR THE RIGHT REASONS
TO CARE FOR VETERANS AND THEIR
FAMILIES, TO TAKE THAT AWAY, I
DON'T KNOW WHERE I WOULD HAVE
BEEN IN THAT SITUATION, SO I'M
I, I'M LOOKING AT THESE LISTS OF
AMENDMENTS AND I'M SAYING, YEAH,
THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT MAKES
SENSE. WHAT I HEAR OUR AUTHORS
SAYING IS THAT WE ARE LIMITED BY
FEDERAL LAW AND THAT IF WE
COULD, AS YOU KNOW,
CALIFORNIANS, THE BEST STATE IN
THE IN THE NATION, TO SAY, HEY,
WE'RE GOING TO FIX THIS FEDERAL
LAW AND PUT SOME OF THESE
AMENDMENTS, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE WOULD
PREVAIL, AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL.
SO I'M, I'M, I'M TORN HERE
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THAT THERE
ARE BAD ACTORS, AND I KNOW THAT
WE CAN BE LEADERS IN THIS, BUT
AND MAYBE THIS IS PART TO HEAR
FROM THE OPPOSITION. LIKE, WHAT
IS PREVENTING THE OPPOSITION
FROM BEING ACCREDITED AND
SERVING OUR CALIFORNIA VETERANS
IN THE WAY THAT THEY NEED TO BE
SERVED? I THINK THAT QUESTION
COULD BE ANSWERED. IF YOU STEP
UP TO THE MIC. THANK YOU.
DINATO. CLAY AGAIN AND,
COMMITTEE MEMBER, WE'RE GOING TO
KEEP THIS DIALOG OPEN, MAYBE A
LITTLE OUT OF, OF, NORM. BUT I
THINK IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT
YOU'RE EDUCATED ON IT AND THAT
EVERYONE HAS A FAIR OPPORTUNITY
ON BOTH SIDES. SO IF YOU CAN
ANSWER THAT QUESTION, GO RIGHT
AHEAD. THANK YOU. CHAIR, AND
THANK YOU, SENATOR ALVARADO.
GIL. SO JUST VERY BRIEFLY, THERE
IS A THIRD STEP. AND THAT'S I
THINK THE AREA THAT WE OPERATE
IN, WHICH IS YOU HAVE INITIAL
CLAIMS AS, SENATOR MENGIBAR
CALLED OUT AND YOU HAVE THE
APPEALS PROCESS, WHICH I KNOW
THERE ARE VETERANS IN THIS ROOM
WHO WENT THROUGH 12 YEARS FOR AN
APPEAL, SO IT'S A LENGTHY
PROCESS. OUR PROCESS ON AVERAGE,
WE HELP WITH BOTH INITIAL AND
INCREASED CLAIMS. AND OUR
AVERAGE LENGTH OF TIME IS NINE
MONTHS. IN TERMS OF HELPING A
VETERAN, MR. GREEN, WAS HE
WAITED TWO YEARS FOR HIS INITIAL
, CLAIM, AND THEN HE WAS AT HE
WAS UNDERRATED FROM 2013 UNTIL
HE WORKED WITH US. AND IT TOOK
US TWO MONTHS TO GET HIM THE
ACCURATE RATING ON AN INCREASED
CLAIM THAT HE DESERVED. AND HOW
WE DID THAT. AGAIN, THE PROCESS
IS NOT OBJECTIVE. IT'S NOT
OBJECTIVE WITH THE VA CURRENTLY.
SO I USED TO WORK AT
CEDARS-SINAI FOR FIVE YEARS. I
MANAGED DOCTORS. IF YOU MANAGE
THE DOCTORS THAT THIS PROCESS IS
NOT FOR ANOTHER PROVIDER, IT'S
FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSON.
THE RATER WHO MAKES THE
DETERMINATION A NON-MEDICAL
PERSON IS LOOKING AT WHAT A
DOCTOR HAS WRITTEN AND MAKING
THE DETERMINATION BASED ON THEIR
TRAINING. SO IF YOU TRAIN THE
DOCTORS ON HOW TO CONDUCT THE
EXAM, THEN YOU CAN GET THE
BETTER RESULTS THAT WE ARE
USUALLY SEE. AND OVER 90% OF THE
VETERANS THAT USE OUR SERVICE
RECEIVE A FAVORABLE OUTCOME. AND
WE DO NOT GET PAID UNLESS THERE
IS A FAVORABLE OUTCOME. SO THE
VETERAN IS NOT PAYING ANY MONEY
OUT OF POCKET, OUR INCENTIVE IS
TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND THEN ALL
OF THOSE PROCESSES TAKE PROFIT.
IF I MAY, SENATOR, WASN'T YOUR
QUESTION IS WHAT SERVICE CAN YOU
PROVIDE WHICH THEY CAN'T PROVIDE
, WHETHER THEY'RE BEING A
CREDITOR OR NOT ACCREDITED?
THAT'S CORRECT. CORRECT OKAY.
WOULD YOU SO THE YOUR YOUR
ANSWER TO THAT PLEASE. SO FOR
EXAMPLE THE INCREASED CLAIM IS
AN EXAM IS A PRIME EXAMPLE. SO
RIGHT NOW IF ANY VETERAN WAS TO
COME IN AND HAVE AN EITHER A 10%
RATING LIKE MR. GREEN HAD BEFORE
OR A DENIAL, THEN THE ONLY OTHER
ALTERNATIVE IS AN APPEAL. AND
THE AVERAGE APPEAL IS, WHAT, 3
TO 5 YEARS OR IN SOME TIMES 12
YEARS. HOWEVER, AN INCREASE IS
ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THAT ALLOWS
THAT VETERAN TO GET A SECOND
BITE OF THE APPLE. BUT AGAIN,
IT'S NOT CURRENTLY WE CAN'T GET
ACCREDITED TO DO THAT. AND
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE FIGHTING TO DO
AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL. AND THE
QUESTION IS, ARE OPEN TO YOU IF
YOU WISH. SO YOU CAN DO
EVERYTHING BUT RECOVER A FEE TO
GET A FAVORABLE, MORE FAVORABLE
OUTCOME. AND WORKING OUTSIDE OF
THE VA SYSTEM OF DOCTORS. IS
THAT WHAT I HEAR? SO THAT'S OUR
APPROACH AT VBG. I WOULD SAY
THAT AGAIN, THE TRADITIONAL THE
STATUS QUO IS JUST WHAT WE'VE
HEARD, THE INITIAL OR THE
APPEAL. RIGHT RIGHT. OKAY. ONE
THING THAT WE DO NEED TO MAKE
CLEAR HERE IS THAT WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT AN INITIAL CLAIM THAT IS
JUDGED BY THE INDIVIDUAL CLAIM,
SO IT'S NOT, I WENT IN AND
SUBMITTED MY FIRST ATTEMPT AND I
PUT IN FOR FOUR THINGS. MY
INITIALS DONE. NOW EVERYTHING
ELSE I DO FORWARD IS AN APPEAL.
THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT WORKS.
EVERY INDIVIDUAL, CONDITION IS
TREATED SEPARATELY. SO IF I DID
MY INITIAL APPEAL AND I PUT IN
FOR FIVE THINGS, MY INITIAL
CLAIM, AND THEN I COME BACK
LATER AND I WANT TO CLAIM PTSD,
WHICH I DIDN'T DO BEFORE, THAT'S
NOW CONSIDERED AN INITIAL CLAIM
NUMBER ONE. SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE
THAT HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD HERE,
NUMBER TWO, WHEN WE LOOK AT A
VETERAN COMING IN, I'M LOOKING
AT THREE PILLARS. THE FIRST
THING I'M LOOKING FOR IS THINGS
THAT A VETERAN SHOULD HAVE
CLAIMED THAT THEY DIDN'T, BASED
ON AN EXTENSIVE MEDICAL RECORDS
REVIEW. THE SECOND I'M LOOKING
AT SECONDARY CONDITIONS. SO IF
YOU'RE RATED FOR YOUR BACK AND
NOW THAT I'M GETTING
RADICULOPATHY IN MY LEG, YOU CAN
CLAIM THAT AS A SECONDARY
CONDITION. BOTH OF THOSE ARE
CONSIDERED INITIAL CLAIMS. 80%
OF THE WORK I DO TO HELP
VETERANS IS IN THOSE TWO SPACES.
THE THIRD PILLAR WE LOOK AT IS
THINGS THAT YOU'VE EITHER BEEN
DENIED FOR IN THE PAST, OR THAT
WE FEEL THAT YOU'RE UNDERRATED
FOR. THAT WOULD BE AN APPEAL.
THAT IS THE ONLY ONE OF THE
THREE PILLARS I CAN ASSIST WITH,
AND WE BELIEVE THAT THAT IS NOT
SERVING VETERANS. SENATOR WE'RE
NOT GETTING YOUR ANSWER. THE
QUESTION IS ABOUT ACCREDITATION,
I BELIEVE. YES, YES. SO BY NOT
BEING ACCREDITED, WHAT WOULD YOU
WHAT COULD YOU NOT DO? SO BEING
ACCREDITED. SO BY BEING
ACCREDITED, BY NOT BEING
ACCREDITED, I CAN HELP ON ALL
THREE OF THOSE PILLARS I JUST
DISCUSSED. IF I BECOME
ACCREDITED, I CAN ONLY HELP WITH
THAT LAST PILLAR. I CAN ONLY
HELP WITH THINGS THAT YOU'VE
BEEN DENIED FOR IN THE PAST, OR
THAT WE BELIEVE YOU'RE
UNDERRATED FOR. AND MOST OF MY
WORK IS DONE IN THE FIRST TWO
PILLARS, WHICH I WOULD NOT BE
ABLE TO DO AS AN ACCREDITED
AGENT. CAN I ONTO THAT? ALSO,
SENATOR, I WOULD BELIEVE I THINK
ONE OF YOUR EARLIER QUESTIONS,
WAS IT ABOUT MONEY AND CHARGE?
CORRECT? CORRECT. ABOUT THE FEE,
YES. SO, I'M I'M BEING ABLE TO
DISTINGUISH THE INITIAL CLAIM OR
INITIAL APPLICATION AND A FEE,
AND THEN THERE ARE THESE OTHER
PIECES. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
EACH IDENTIFIED DISABILITY OR
INJURY OR IMPACT BEING A NEW
CLAIM. AND THAT IF YOU ARE
ACCREDITED, YOU CAN ONLY HELP
WITH THE INITIAL NOT ANYTHING
THAT WAS DISCOVERED AFTER THE
INITIAL NØ. MR. CHAIR, AND I'D
LOVE TO SAY A LITTLE BIT. AND,
SENATOR, I WANT YOU TO HAVE A
DIALOG. SO PLEASE, SENATOR, GO
AHEAD AND I'LL FIRST ANSWER THIS
ANYWAY. ONE ACCREDITOR,
UNACCREDITED, CAN HELP WITH THE
INITIAL FEE. ANYONE INITIAL
CLAIM? NO ONE UNDER FEDERAL LAW
IS ALLOWED TO CHARGE FOR AN
INITIAL FEE. ANYONE CAN HELP
ANYONE. ANYONE FOR 500 INITIAL
CLAIMS, AS LONG AS THEY'RE
DIFFERENT. ANYONE CAN HELP,
RIGHT? IT DOESN'T. THIS. NO
VETERAN IS PREVENTED RIGHT NOW
FROM SEEKING ANY HELP, WHETHER
IT'S FROM A NONPROFIT YOU SAID,
WHETHER IT'S FROM A FAITH BASED
YOU MENTIONED, WHETHER IT'S FROM
THE VSO, WHETHER IT'S FROM AN
UNCREDITED. THEY'RE UNDER
FEDERAL STATUTE PREVENTED FROM
HAVING TO PAY FOR THE INITIAL
FEE. NOW, REGARDING THE TIME IT
TAKES, NO ONE HAS CONTROL OF HOW
LONG IT TAKES FOR AN APPLICATION
TO BE APPROVED. TONIGHT OR LOW
RATING DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU PAY
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR IT OR
YOU GET IT FOR FREE. DOES NOT.
THAT MEANS NOTHING BECAUSE WE
DON'T. NO ONE HAS THE ABILITY TO
GO TO THE VA UNLESS MAYBE THAT'S
YOUR COUSIN OVER THERE. YOU CAN
ASK SOMEONE. NO ONE HAS THE
ABILITY TO JUMP THE LINE. NOW,
IN TERMS OF SOME, THE OPPOSITION
SAID THAT THEY ONLY CHARGE IF
THEY GET IF THEY GET A RATE
INCREASE. NOT ALL ARE OPERATING
UNDER THAT UMBRELLA. MY CASE, I
HAD TO PAY UP FRONT AND I WAS
TOLD YOU MIGHT NOT GET A RATE
INCREASE, BUT YOU HAVE TO PAY US
UP FRONT AND YOU MAY NOT GET
YOUR MONEY BACK. YOU WILL NOT
GET YOUR MONEY BACK IF YOU GET
NO RATE INCREASE. IT'S THE
SERVICE. IT'S THE RISK THAT YOU
TAKE. BUT I TOOK THAT RISK.
YOU'RE HEARING FROM TWO
DIFFERENT COMPANIES. THERE ARE
HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF
COMPANIES THAT EXIST OF THIS
NATURE. AND A LOT DON'T WORK,
DON'T OPERATE IN CALIFORNIA. MY
COMPANY OPERATES IN TEXAS. ONE
OF THE COMPANIES WE HEAR FROM
OPERATES IN NEW YORK. SO IT'S
EVEN HARDER TO HAVE AN OVERSIGHT
OVER COMPANIES THAT ARE
HEADQUARTERED OUTSIDE OF OUR
STATE. AND LASTLY, RIGHT NOW,
REGARDLESS, AS AN ACCREDITED
AGENT, YOU CAN SEND YOUR VETERAN
THAT YOU'RE WORKING ON TO ANY
DOCTOR YOU WANT TO SEND THEM TO.
THE ONE OF MY WITNESSES HERE
FROM THE VFW WORKS DIRECTLY WITH
UC DAVIS. THAT IS NOT A VA
ACCREDITED HOSPITAL. THAT'S JUST
A UC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER, THEY
HAVE NO CONNECTIONS TO THE VA.
THEY JUST TREAT THE PATIENT AS
THEY SEE THE PATIENT. THANK YOU.
I'M GOING TO PONDER AND ALLOW
OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
TO ASK SENATOR UMBERG. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THANK YOU,
SENATOR MENGIBAR. SENATOR
MENGIBAR, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PASSION, YOUR ADVOCACY ON BEHALF
OF VETERANS. YOU'VE NOT BEEN
HERE ALL THAT LONG, BUT YOU'VE
ESTABLISHED YOURSELF AS A LEADER
IN THIS SPACE. AND I'M GRATEFUL
FOR IT. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO IS THAT
IN TERMS OF ACCREDITATION IN
YOUR BILL, I AM 100% ON BOARD
THAT EVERYONE WHO ASSISTS A
VETERAN IN THE APPLICATION
PROCESS AND THE APPEAL PROCESS
SHOULD HAVE SOME EXPERTISE. AND
THAT EXPERTISE SHOULD BE
VERIFIED BY SOME GOVERNMENTAL
ENTITY. SO I'M 100% ACCORD WITH
THAT, THERE ARE SOME OTHER
CHALLENGES, THOUGH, I THINK. AND
I THIS IS NOT OUR FIRST RODEO,
IS IT? IS IT, MR. MEYER, THE VA
DISABILITY SYSTEM. AND I'M GOING
TO ASK MR. MEYER AGAIN, WHEN WE
WERE IN JUDICIARY, YOU AGREED
WITH ME THAT IT IS AN
ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM, IN OTHER
WORDS, THAT YOU, AS AN
APPLICANT, YOUR ADVERSARY NOT
TERMED AS SUCH. BUT BUT THE WAY
THE SYSTEM IS SET UP IS, IS THE
VA BECAUSE THE VA, PUSHES BACK
ON YOU AND THEN IT'S YOUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO PUSH BACK ON
THEM. DO YOU STILL AGREE THAT
IT'S AN ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM? I
DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD SAY
ACTUALLY ADVERSARIAL. IT IS A
COMPLICATED SYSTEM, SO, FOR
INSTANCE, WE JUST HAD A VETERAN
THAT WE WERE WE STARTED HELPING
ABOUT A WEEK AGO, SUBMITTED HIS
CLAIM, USED THE COMPANY,
SUBMITTED HIS CLAIM, HAD TO PAY
$10,500, ROUGHLY GOT A 90%
RATING. WELL, THE VA CAME BACK
AND REEVALUATED HIS MEDICAL AND
CHANGED HIM FROM 90% DOWN TO 20.
AND NOW HE'S GOT TO PAY ALL OF
THAT BACK. SO THE SYSTEM IS NOT
SET UP TO AUTOMATICALLY GIVE YOU
THE HIGHEST RATING POSSIBLE.
THEY LOOK AT IT, BUT THEY THEY
NEED TO SCRUTINIZE IT ALSO
BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT
DON'T TELL THE TRUTH ALL THE
TIME ON SOME OF THE MEDICAL
STUFF. SO IT IS A, A VERY
DIFFICULT SYSTEM AND IT'S NOT
MEANT ALWAYS TO BE. YOU DON'T
FEEL LIKE IT'S FRIENDLY, OKAY.
YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T FEEL LIKE
IT'S FRIENDLY. YOU. SENATOR
ALVARADO GIL, FOR SHARING YOUR
LIVED EXPERIENCE WITH US, WHICH
WAS QUITE ILLUSTRATIVE. I
THOUGHT, AND SO IN CALIFORNIA,
IF YOU GET INJURED ON THE
WORKSITE IN THE LINE OF DUTY, SO
TO SPEAK, AND YOU APPLY TO SEEK
COMPENSATION THROUGH THE WORKERS
COMPENSATION SYSTEM, YOU CAN
HAVE AN ATTORNEY WRITE. IF YOU
DON'T, I'LL ANSWER MY EXPERT. I
WILL ANSWER MY OWN QUESTION.
YES, YOU CERTAINLY CAN HAVE AN
ATTORNEY. AND THE REASON YOU CAN
HAVE AN ATTORNEY IS BECAUSE IT
IS A SYSTEM THAT IS ADVERSARIAL
OR QUASI ADVERSARIAL, SO THAT
YOU, AS THE APPLICANT, YOU AS
THE INJURED WORKER, CAN PUT YOUR
BEST FOOT FORWARD AND SEEK FAIR
COMPENSATION. AND IN THE VA
SYSTEM, BY COMPARISON, IN THE VA
SYSTEM, WHEN YOU'RE INJURED AT
WORK, WHICH IS ON DUTY, EXCEPT
YOUR INJURIES IN THE MILITARY
SOMETIMES CAN BE MUCH MORE
CATASTROPHIC THAN THEY ARE ON
THE WORK SIDE. IF YOU'RE INJURED
IN THE LINE OF DUTY IN THE
MILITARY, YOU MAY NOT PAY
SOMEONE TO HELP YOU WITH YOUR
APPLICATION. THAT'S RIGHT. NO,
YOU CAN YOU CAN HAVE SOMEBODY
HELP YOU. YOU MAY NOT PAY
SOMEONE. YOU MAY NOT PAY RIGHT.
OKAY. THE CURRENT FEDERAL LAW.
RIGHT. SO IF SOMEONE HAS
EXPERTISE IN OUR SYSTEM,
TYPICALLY PEOPLE THAT PROVIDE
SERVICE, THEY CHARGE FOR THAT
SERVICE. IF THEY HAVE
PARTICULARLY UNIQUE EXPERTISE.
I'M A LAWYER AND LAWYERS CHARGE
ALL OVER THE PLACE IN TERMS OF
THEIR EXPERTISE, SO IS THERE ARE
THERE OTHER SYSTEMS THAT WE HAVE
THAT YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH AND
MAYBE I'LL ASK THE OPPOSITION TO
WHERE WHERE WE REQUIRE THE
APPLICANT TO BE PROHIBITED FROM
SEEKING THE BEST EXPERTISE THEY
CAN FIND. IS THERE ANY OTHER
SYSTEM WHERE WE DO THAT? SO FAR
AS YOU KNOW? WELL, I BELIEVE
THAT THE SYSTEMS WE HAVE THAT
REQUIRE LICENSING, IS JUST THAT
YOU YOU MIGHT HAVE SOMEBODY WHO
UNDERSTANDS THE LAW TOTALLY AND
MAY MAKE A GREAT LAWYER, BUT IF
THEY HAVEN'T PASSED THE BAR,
THEY CAN'T. THAT MAY BE THE BEST
PERSON TO PRESENT YOUR CASE, BUT
THEY CAN'T PRESENT YOUR CASE.
AND I ACCEPT THAT. I ACCEPT
THAT, IN FACT, I ACCEPT THAT THE
FACT THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE
ACCREDITED. BUT IF YOU ARE
ACCREDITED, RIGHT, YOU MAY NOT
CHARGE FOR YOUR SERVICE. SO IN
ANY EVENT, I FIND THIS TO BE
ANOMALOUS. AND I, SENATOR
MENGIBAR, AND I HAVE HAD
EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS BECAUSE
I FIND THIS TO BE ANOMALOUS AND
I FIND IT TO BE UNFAIR, I FIND
IT TO BE UNFAIR, AND I FIND THAT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS
CREATED A SYSTEM THAT IS
INHERENTLY UNFAIR AND SO I, I
FIND LOOKING AT THE ANALYSIS AND
NUMBER ONE SAYS THIS BILL
PROHIBITS PERSONS FROM DIRECTLY
OR INDIRECTLY SOLICITING,
CONTRACTING FOR OR CHARGING
BASICALLY FOR THEIR SERVICES.
AND THE INITIAL APPLICATION AS,
AS YOU JUST ILLUSTRATED AND I
THINK, SENATOR MENGIBAR AND
CERTAINLY SENATOR ALVARADO GIL
JUST ILLUSTRATED THE INITIAL
APPLICATION IS, IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT PART OF THE PROCESS,
BECAUSE IF YOU ARE, FOR EXAMPLE,
YOU ARE BLOWN UP BY AN IED IN
AFGHANISTAN, YOU MAY HAVE LOST A
LEG AND YOU MAY APPLY FOR THAT,
BUT YOU MAY NOT APPLY. YOU MAY
FORGET THAT YOU ALSO HAD A
CONCUSSION OR YOU HAVE TRAUMATIC
BRAIN INJURY RATHER. AND SO IF
YOU DON'T APPLY INITIALLY, IF
YOU DON'T COVER ALL THOSE BASES,
YOU'RE HARMING YOURSELF. DO YOU
AGREE WITH THAT? I AGREE WITH
THAT. BUT IF YOU COME, LIKE, FOR
INSTANCE, THE SERVICE OFFICERS
WHO WORK FOR ME, THEY GO THROUGH
ALL OF THAT WITH WHEN THEY SIT
DOWN WITH THE VETERAN THEY GO
THROUGH AND THEY TALK ABOUT
THEIR TIME AND SERVICE. JUST YOU
KNOW, A PRIME EXAMPLE IS WHAT
YOU STATED IN THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE, OR IT COULD HAVE BEEN
ON OUR, OUR CALL THAT WE HAD
ABOUT THE JOB THAT YOUR SISTER
IN LAW DID. SHE WENT THROUGH
PIECE BY PIECE THROUGH YOUR
CAREER, ENLISTED EVERYTHING OUT.
IF YOU HAVE GOOD QUALITY AND WE
KNOW THAT THERE'S NOT ALWAYS
GOOD QUALITY, IT DOESN'T MATTER
IF YOU'RE ACCREDITED OR NOT
ACCREDITED, BUT IF YOU HAVE GOOD
QUALITY, ACCREDITED PEOPLE
WORKING FOR YOU, THEY WILL GO
THROUGH AND THEY WILL MAKE SURE
FOR SENATOR ALVARADO, GIL, WE
WOULD HAVE SAT DOWN AND WENT
THROUGH EVERYTHING THAT SHE
NEEDED, AID AND ATTENDANCE ALL
BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS I AM NOT IN
ANY WAY DISPARAGING THE SERVICES
PERFORMED BY VSOS. WE HAVE SOME
OF THE BEST VSOS PROBABLY IN THE
COUNTRY. AS YOU ILLUSTRATED. MY
SISTER IN LAW WAS A VSO, AND
INDEED SHE WENT THROUGH EVERY
YEAR OF SERVICE AND EVERY
ASSIGNMENT, EVERY INJURY AND
EVERY POSSIBLE PERMUTATION,
WHICH IS WONDERFUL. BUT EVERY
VSO IS NOT THAT WAY. AND AS TO
THE VETERAN HERSELF THAT SHE, IN
MY VIEW, SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY
AND I GET THAT WE'RE CONTRARY TO
FEDERAL LAW. I 100% GET THAT. I
GET THAT THE CALIFORNIA, IS
DIFFERENT. CALIFORNIA IS THE
ONLY STATE IN THE UNION THAT
DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY SORT OF TAX
PROTECTION FOR RETIREES.
CALIFORNIA IS ONE OF THE VERY
FEW STATES IN THE UNION, VERY
FEW HANDFUL OF STATES, THAT
DOESN'T ALLOW EMPLOYERS TO
PROVIDE A, A, A PREFERENCE FOR
VETERANS. WE'RE OUTLIERS. AND IN
THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE MY HOPE
THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE
CHAMPION, THE ADVOCATE TO SAY TO
VETERANS, LOOK AT WE'VE GOT
GREAT VSOS, THE VFW, THE
AMERICAN LEGION, THE DISABLED
VETERANS OF AMERICA. DO
WONDERFUL WORK. BUT BUT WE'RE
NOT GOING TO LIMIT YOU TO THAT.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO LIMIT YOU TO
THAT. AND WE'RE GOING TO PUSH
THE ENVELOPE, AND WE'RE GOING TO
PUSH THE ENVELOPE. SO YOU
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN HAVE TO
COME BACK AND SAY, YOU KNOW
WHAT, CALIFORNIA, YOU'RE OUT OF
LINE. YOU'RE OUT OF LINE. YOU
SHOULD ADHERE TO OUR POSITION
THAT VETERANS ARE, I SUPPOSE,
TO, THAT VETERANS CAN'T MAKE
THAT DECISION ON THEIR OWN FOR
WHATEVER REASON. SO ANYWAY,
HAVING SAID THAT, I REALIZE THAT
I'VE PUT A LOT OUT THERE. I'M
HAPPY FOR YOU TO RESPOND, BUT I
HAVE A GRAVE CONCERN ABOUT THAT,
AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE
CALIFORNIA STEP IN THE PLACE OF
BEING ITS VETERANS CHAMPION. SO
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU.
IF I MAY WEIGH IN NOW, I THINK
WE HAVE FROM THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE. MR. LIU, ARE
YOU HERE? YEAH. WOULD YOU STEP
FORWARD, PLEASE, BECAUSE WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT, IS THIS LEGAL
WITHIN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA?
OUR WITNESSES ON THE NEGATIVE
ARE FROM OUT OF STATE. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT CALIFORNIA. WE
NEED AN OPINION. IF, ALL OF US
CAN HEAR WHAT THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL SAYS ABOUT THIS TYPE OF
OPERATION, OPERATING HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. MR. LIU, IF YOU CAN
ANSWER THAT, I SHOULD HAVE
MENTIONED WHEN I WAS AT THE MIC
THE FIRST TIME THAT I'M
AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU, MADAM. I
DIDN'T MENTION THAT THE FIRST
TIME, SO THANK YOU, I THINK WE
JUST HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE
ANALYSIS. I'M. THE ANALYSIS LAYS
OUT WHAT THE FEDERAL LAW IS HERE
ON PAGE TWO, TWO AND THREE, I
BELIEVE IT'S TWO AND THREE. A
PAGE, PAGE ONE AND TWO. SORRY.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW. SECTION SO
THIS SAME LAW, THE FEDERAL LAW
UNDER THE VÀ, SAYS THAT, YOU
HAVE TO BE ACCREDITED
ESSENTIALLY IN ORDER TO ASSIST
WITH THE PREPARATION,
PRESENTATION OR PROSECUTION OF
AN INITIAL OF INITIAL CLAIM. AND
THE SAME LAW SAYS THAT NO ONE
CAN CHARGE FOR THAT SERVICE,
INCLUDING THE FOLKS SITTING AT
THIS TABLE. NO ONE. SO THOSE ARE
TWO SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THINGS
THAT ARE KIND OF GETTING
CONFLATED HERE, MY BOSS, WHEN WE
WERE, CONSIDERING MOVING THIS
BILL, YOU KNOW, REACHED OUT TO
THE MILITARY AND VETERANS
COMMUNITY AND WHAT WE HEARD WAS
A VERY STRONG PREFERENCE FOR THE
BILL YOU SEE BEFORE YOU, WHICH
IS OVERSIGHT. WE AGREE WITH THE
FEDERAL LAW. HOW WE READ THE
FEDERAL LAW TO REQUIRE
ACCREDITATION IN THIS AREA. WE
AGREE WITH THE POLICY OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS
THAT MEMBERS SHOULD NOT BE
PAYING THEIR OWN MONEY OUT OF
THEIR OWN ENTITLEMENT. THE
BENEFITS THAT THEY'VE EARNED TO
FILE AN INITIAL APPLICATION
THAT'S WHY IT'S SET UP THIS WAY.
THAT IS THE POLICY, THAT WE'VE
HAD FOR MANY, MANY YEARS,
DECADES HERE. AND WE ARE SIMPLY
HERE TO UPHOLD THAT POLICY IN
CALIFORNIA. THE MEMBER SHOULD
NOT BE PAYING FOR THIS, EVEN IF
THERE ARE SOME FOLKS WHO WHO ARE
WILLING TO PAY, AN ACCREDITED
COMPANY TO DO THAT, BUT WE ARE
TRYING TO UPHOLD THAT POLICY.
NOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH
OPPOSITION, I THINK A LOT OF
THIS, YOU KNOW, GOOD APPLES
VERSUS BAD APPLES ANALYSIS IS
SORT OF OVERLOOKING A VERY MAIN
POINT OF THE BILL HERE, WHICH IS
THAT WE NEED OVERSIGHT OVER ALL
ACTORS IN THIS SPACE. AND I
AGREE WITH SENATOR WHO SAID
EVERYONE SHOULD BE ACCREDITED.
THAT IS THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLE
OF THIS BILL. IT'S NOT WHETHER
YOU'RE A GOOD DRIVER OR A BAD
DRIVER, IT'S WHETHER YOU HAVE A
LICENSE FROM THE DMV TO DRIVE ON
THE ROADS OF THE STATE. BECAUSE
IF YOU'RE AN UNLICENSED DRIVER,
THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT OVER YOU.
AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU ARE
A GOOD DRIVER OR A BAD DRIVER,
IF YOU DON'T HAVE A LICENSE, WE
CAN'T PULL YOUR LICENSE OR GET
YOU OFF THE ROAD OR ENSURE THAT
YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE SAME RULES
OF THE ROAD AS EVERYONE ELSE. SO
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE
COMPANIES WHO ARE, UNACCREDITED
AND THEY MAY BE HONORABLE AND
DOING GOOD WORK, BUT THEY DON'T
HAVE ACCREDITATION. THEY ARE
UNACCREDITED. AND WE ARE TRYING
TO ESTABLISH THIS VERY BASIC
PRINCIPLE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD
BE ACCREDITED, FOLLOW THE SAME
RULES OF THE ROAD, BE
ACCOUNTABLE TO THE VÀ, BE UNDER
THE SAME SYSTEM OF OVERSIGHT,
NOT PARALLEL SYSTEMS WHERE SOME
FOLKS ARE FOLLOWING A DIFFERENT
SET OF RULES IN CALIFORNIA AND
THE REST OF THE FOLKS ARE
FOLLOWING A DIFFERENT SET OF
RULES UNDER THE VA. EVERYONE
UNDER THE SAME RULES. THAT'S
BASICALLY WHAT THIS BILL IS
ABOUT. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE
TO COMMENT FURTHER THE WHAT
WE'RE UNDERSTANDING HERE IS
THERE IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. HOW
YOU FEEL PERSONALLY,
EMOTIONALLY, IT'S NOT THE ISSUE.
THE ISSUE IS, IS THIS BILL
WITHIN THE LAW. AND WE'RE VERY
BLESSED TO HAVE AN ATTORNEY,
I'VE GIVEN YOU ALL THE TIME TO
SPEAK. I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND
CONTINUE. SO THE FACT IS THAT,
WE HEARD THAT INITIALLY THEY
CANNOT CHARGE, I'M GOING TO ASK
THE VFW REPRESENTATIVE, DO YOU
CHARGE MONEY AT ALL AT ANY POINT
IN THE PROCESS? NO, SIR. DO YOU
CHARGE MONEY WHEN THE PROCESS
BEGINS? LET ME SAY IT AGAIN. NO
DO YOU CHARGE THE VETERAN MONEY
WHEN HE'S AWARDED BACK? PAY THE
LUMP SUM MONEY? DO YOU DO YOU
HAVE YOUR HANDS OUT THERE TO
RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FOR
THAT SERVICE? NO WELL, LET ME
ASK THE COUNTY VETERANS SERVICE
OFFICERS REPRESENTING THE COUNTY
OF LOS ANGELES, THE, WHEN THE
CLAIM IS FIRST MADE BY YOUR
OFFICE, DO YOU CHARGE?
ABSOLUTELY NOT. AT AND WHEN YOU
FIND THAT THE VETERAN WHO IS
ELIGIBLE FOR BACK PAY. AND THE
REASON I KEEP SAYING BACK PAY
BECAUSE MY OWN BROTHER, RECEIVED
$65,000 CLEAR WHEN HE FINISHED
AND HE DIDN'T HAVE TO GIVE UP
ANY MONEY TO ANYBODY ELSE. AND,
I BELIEVE HE WENT STRAIGHT
THROUGH THE VFW OR THE AMERICAN
LEGION. I FORGET WHAT IT WAS, DO
YOU, AS A COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE,
CHARGE AT THE LUMP SUM? WHEN
MONEY IS PAID TO THE VETERAN, WE
DO NOT. OKAY. AND THESE ARE THE
THINGS THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO
LOOK AT. YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT TO YOUR PERSONAL
SITUATION, TO ANYONE'S PERSONAL
SITUATION, IT IS TRYING TO
ADHERE TO THE LAW. AND THE FACT
IS THAT WHETHER THE VETERANS
ADMINISTRATION, HAS A BACKLOG OR
DOESN'T HAVE A BACKLOG OR THEY
CAN DO IT FASTER, THEY NEED TO
CLEAN THEIR WAYS OR THEY'RE
BEING PUNITIVE. THAT'S NOT THE
ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS THAT PEOPLE
ARE DOING SOMETHING THAT IS
OUTSIDE THE LAW. AND ACCORDING
TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THAT'S
THE ISSUE. AND, AND THAT IS WHY
I'M SUPPORTING THIS BILL AND
ASKING, THE COMMITTEE TO GO
FORWARD WITH IT WHEN WE HAVE OF,
55,000 CLAIMS A YEAR OR WHATEVER
IT MIGHT BE, BUT THE FACT IS
THAT THE VFW, THE AMERICAN
LEGION, EVERY ORGANIZATION OUT
THERE IS NOT ASKING FOR PAY IN
ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. AND, I'M
SORRY, HERE IN CALIFORNIA,
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOULD
DO. HOW THEY DO IT OUTSIDE THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THAT'S NOT
OUR PURVIEW. THAT IS NOT OUR
RESPONSIBILITY. IT IS HERE. AND,
IN REFERENCE TO THE ANALYSIS
THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAD
POINTED OUT THAT THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND THE HUNDREDS OF
SERVICE OFFICERS AND BOTH
EMPLOYEES AND STATE AND VÀ,
THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB WITHIN
THE LAW IN ADDITION TO
ACCREDITATION PROCESS, ANYONE
CAN APPLY. AND WE'RE NOT HOLDING
THAT BACK. SO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
AND THE OVERSIGHT, THE COUNTY
AND SO ON. DO YOU HAVE AN ISSUE
WITH ANY COMPANY GOING THROUGH
THE PROCESS OF ACCREDITATION?
VFW, NØ COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES?
NO, SIR. YOU HAVE NO OPPOSITION
TO ANYONE APPLYING FOR
ACCREDITATION. THÀNH. CORRECT.
TO OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE. DO YOU HAVE ANYONE
PREVENTING ANY INDIVIDUAL FOR
APPLYING FOR ACCREDITATION?
ABSOLUTELY NOT. GOOD. WELL, THEN
IT'S IN ESSENCE, UNETHICAL TO.
CHORUS, A VETERAN AND GET HIM TO
PAY EITHER UP FRONT OR AT THE
END. LET ME ASK YOU THIS ONE
LAST QUESTION, DO YOU ASK THE
VETERAN FOR HIS CHECKING
ACCOUNT, SAVINGS ACCOUNT, AND
ACCESS TO THAT ACCOUNT AT THE
END? AS PART OF THE PROCESS, WE
DO GET THEIR ACCOUNT INFORMATION
AND GIVE IT TO THE VA SO THEY
CAN MAKE THE DEPOSIT. THAT'S
PART OF THE WHAT THEY DO WITH
THE FORMS THAT THEY'RE
COMPLETING, THAT THEY UPLOAD TO
THE VA SYSTEM. BUT NONE OF THOSE
MONIES ARE GEARED TO YOUR
ORGANIZATION, WHETHER IT BE FOR
ANY SERVICES RENDERED BEFORE,
AFTER, DURING. WE DO NOT COLLECT
ANY MONEY FOR INITIAL
SUPPLEMENTAL OR APPEALS. OKAY.
AND, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THE
REASON I ASK THAT LAST ONE IS
BECAUSE THE COMPANIES THAT DO
THIS SORT OF WORK OUTSIDE THE
LAW, THEY ACTUALLY ASK FOR
ACCESS TO THEIR FINANCIAL,
WHEREWITHAL AND THEIR STATEMENTS
AND EVERYTHING ELSE SO THEY CAN,
AND I'LL USE THE FIRM, GRAB THE
MONIES BEFORE IT'S GIVEN TO THE
VETERAN SO THEY CAN GRAB THEIR
SHARE BEFORE IT GOES TO THE
VETERAN. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT. AND, AS I HAD
MENTIONED EARLIER, MY TWO SONS
WHO ARE BOTH COMBAT VETERANS, IF
THEY FIND THEMSELVES IN THE
SITUATION THÀNH, I HOPE THAT
THEY TURN TO THE VA. I HOPE THEY
TURN TO THE COUNTY VETERANS
SERVICE OFFICERS. AND I WILL
TELL YOU THIS, SENATOR, BEFORE
YOU ARRIVED AND, SENATOR, YOU
REMEMBER WE ASKED WE WERE ASKED
FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO
HELP THE COUNTY VETERANS SERVICE
OFFICERS, AND WE PROVIDED THAT
FIRST INITIAL $5 MILLION. WE'RE
PROVIDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO
HIRE MORE VETERAN SERVICE
OFFICERS IN THE COUNTIES
THROUGHOUT THE STATE. SO WE ARE
TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN HERE IN
THE STATE TO OPEN THOSE DOORS.
SO ALL VETERANS CAN RECEIVE THE
CARE THAT THEY NEED. SO WITH
THAT, I AM VOTING TO MOVE THIS
BILL FORWARD. AND I WOULD LIKE
TO ASK IF WE'RE HAVE THE QUORUM,
WE CAN GO FORWARD. SOMEBODY. YOU
CAN'T MOVE THE BILL, SIR. NO,
I'M SORRY, I COMMENT. I'M ASKING
FOR A MOTION RIGHT NOW,
PERMISSION JUST TO CLOSE OFF IN
THE COMMENT. YEAH, I'VE BEEN
PONDERING. OKAY. GO AHEAD, I
APPRECIATE THIS DISCUSSION, I, I
KNEW THAT THIS DISCUSSION WAS
GOING TO BE PASSIONATE AND
MEANINGFUL, BEING THE, THE
FAMILY MEMBER, REPRESENTATIVE ON
THIS COMMITTEE, ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT I DO, WHEN I,
DETERMINE MY DECISIONS IS NOT
ONLY MY OWN LIVED EXPERIENCES,
BUT I, I, I HONOR THE SERVICE OF
THE VETERANS THAT ARE ON THIS
COMMITTEE, AND I WILL TELL YOU,
I WOULD GO DOWN A DARK ALLEY.
ALLEY WITH SENATOR MENGIBAR ANY
DAY OF THE WEEK, SO, SO, YOU
KNOW. RIGHT. RIGHT. RIGHT. SO SO
HAVING THIS BILL BEFORE US FROM
SENATOR MENGIBAR IS, IS
EXTREMELY MEANINGFUL. AND I'LL
TELL YOU, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
BONTA KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING BY
HAVING THE SPOKESPERSON, SENATOR
MENGIBAR HERE, I APPRECIATE THE
ABILITY TO SPEAK FRANKLY ON THIS
BILL. AND TO HEAR THE
OPPOSITION, I DID CONFER WITH
MY, MY ADVISORS WITHIN DISTRICT
WHO ARE DECORATED, VETERANS,
PURPLE HEART, AND I ESTEEM THEM
VERY MUCH, AND THEY ARE URGING
ME TO SUPPORT THIS BILL. SO THIS
IS NOT ME RESPONDING. THROUGH
EMOTION OR THROUGH ANYTHING
OTHER THAN TESTIMONY AND
DETERMINATION AND TRUST. AND I
WANT TO ALSO, YOU KNOW,
COMMUNICATE THE TRUST THAT WE IN
CALIFORNIA, MUST PUT IN OUR
STATE ELECTED OFFICERS, WE RELY
ON OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL TO GUIDE
US IN WHAT IS LEGAL AND WHAT IS
RIGHT FOR CALIFORNIA. SO I WILL
MOVE TO SUPPORT THIS BILL AND
MOVE MAKE THE MOTION, WITH THAT
CAVEAT THAT I AM PUTTING MY
TRUST INTO, THIS BILL MOVING
THROUGH THE, FOR THE RIGHT
REASONS WITH THOSE LEGAL
PARAMETERS THAT WILL CARE FOR
OUR VETERANS, AND ON THE ADVICE
OF BOTH MY DISTRICT AND MY
CONSCIENCE. SO THANK YOU. I MOVE
THE BILL. WE HAVE A MOTION. DID
YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT? DID
YOU MAKE THE MOTION? SHE MADE
THE MOTION. JUST GO RIGHT AHEAD.
SO JUST JUST A FINAL POINT. WE
TALKED ABOUT THIS ADVERSARIAL
PROCESS. I ANALOGIZE IT TO
WORKERS COMPENSATION. LET ME
GIVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ANOTHER ANALOGY THAT YOU ALL CAN
WRESTLE WITH SOMETIME IS THAT,
IF YOU'RE CHARGED WITH A CRIME,
YOU'RE IN AN ADVERSARIAL
PROCESS. AND TO BE REPRESENTED,
IF YOU ARE THE ACCUSED, YOU NEED
TO BE REPRESENTED BY A MEMBER OF
THE BAR. AND WE PROVIDE PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ALL OVER THE STATE.
THEY'RE EXCELLENT. WE HAVE VSOS
AND WE HAVE AMERICAN LEGION WHO
ARE BY AND LARGE, EXCELLENT. BUT
I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL WOULD EVER
SUPPORT A BILL THAT SAYS, YOU
KNOW, ONCE YOU'RE CHARGED WITH A
CRIME, YOU MUST USE A PUBLIC
DEFENDER. YOU MUST NOT BE ABLE
TO PAY SOMEONE WHO CAN REPRESENT
YOU. YOU MUST NOT BE ABLE TO
CHOOSE THAT PERSON. I CAN'T
IMAGINE THAT. SO I, I WILL LEAVE
IT AT THAT, SO UNFORTUNATELY, I
WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY. BUT I LOOK FORWARD.
I'M HOPING THAT THERE WILL BE
SOME AMENDMENTS WHERE CALIFORNIA
CAN LEAN FORWARD, REQUIRE
ACCREDITATION, BUT NOT SUCCUMB
TO WHAT I THINK IS A SORT OF
WEIRD SITUATION WHERE WE LIMIT
VETERANS AND THEIR OPPORTUNITY
TO CHOOSE THEIR BEST
REPRESENTATIVES. SO YEAH, I JUST
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE ONCE AGAIN
THAT IT'S NOT THAT THE VETERAN
CANNOT GET LEGAL REPRESENTATION.
HE HAS TO SUBMIT THAT FIRST
INITIAL AFTER IT'S DENIED HE CAN
GET REPRESENTATION. LET ME MAKE
THAT CLEAR. AM I CLEAR, SENATOR?
THE VETERAN CAN GO TO THE VFW.
HE CAN GO TO THE COUNTY, IF HE'S
NOT HAPPY WITH THAT INITIAL,
PROCESS THAT BEGINNING AND IS
DENIED, THEN BY ALL MEANS, HE
CAN PICK UP THE PHONE, FIND AN
ATTORNEY, AND GO BACK AT IT. AND
AM I CORRECT ON THAT? THE ONLY
THING I WOULD CHANGE IS HE SHE
FEMALE VETERANS I KNOW THAT
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A
MOTION ON THE FLOOR, AND, LET'S
CALL FOR THE VOTE. SB 1124. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS. BUT FIRST WE
REFER TO APPROPRIATIONS.
ARCHULETA Ã ARCHULETA I GROVE.
ALVARADO GIL ALVARADO. GIL I
MENGIBAR I MENGIBAR I UMBERG, SO
THAT'S THREE. IT DOES PASS AND
THAT, WITH THE THREE VOTES, THAT
BILL WILL PASS. CONGRATULATIONS,
SENATOR, YOUR GUESTS OPPOSED
POSITIVE. NEGATIVE. WHATEVER.
PLEASE TELL THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME HERE AS
WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. AND WE'RE GOING TO HOLD
THE ROLL OPEN AND, WE'LL WAIT
AND GET THE OTHERS BACK. SO IT'S
BROKEN. OH, YEAH. I NEED A VOTE
ON EVERYTHING. BUT THE LAST BILL
. YES. THANK YOU
.
YEAH. YES, SIR. MAY I CALL THE
VOTE SENATOR
?
CALL THE REST OF THE VOTES.
SENATOR SANDERS ÓRDENES, CALL.
OH, YEAH? WELL, HE GOT. I'M
OPENING THE ROLL AND CALLING THE
VOTES, I BELIEVE. GO RIGHT
AHEAD, MADAM SECRETARY, SENATE
BILL 943 DO PASS, BUT FIRST
REFER IT WITH TO APPROPRIATIONS.
MENGIBAR AND I THAT PASSES OUT
THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR,
MENGIBAR A MENGIBAR I THAT'S
FIVE ZERO, SENATE BILL 1097, DO
PASS BUT FIRST REFERRED TO
JUDICIARY GROWTH MENGIBAR
MENGIBAR I THAT'S FOUR THAT'S
FOUR ZERO PASSES OUT. OKAY. WE
GOT THEM ALL, NO. NOT YET.
SENATE BILL 1500. DO PASS, BUT
FIRST REFERRED APPROPRIATIONS
GROWTH MENGIBAR MENGIBAR I THAT
PASSES OUT LAST ONE I THINK, YOU
VOTED ON THAT ONE. LET ME MAKE
SURE AND THEN 1124 GOT IT. SO
WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU MA'AM.
CONGRATULATIONS. HOLY. 520
COMING BACK, NO, SHE'S NOT
COMING BACK. YEAH. SO, SIR, YOU
CAN ANNOUNCE THAT WE'RE CLOSING
THE. ARE WE DONE? WE'RE ALL GOOD
. WHAT ABOUT GROVE? SHE'S NOT
COMING BACK. SHE'S NOT COMING
BACK. SHE'S NOT COMING BACK.
OKAY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. OH
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE. THE,
MEETING FOR THE MILITARY AND
VETERANS AFFAIRS IS NOW CLOSED.
THANK YOU