Mark Alford (R-MO)
VA Emergency Transportation Act
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The VA Emergency Transportation Act seeks to amend title 38 of the United States Code. It changes the term "emergency treatment" to "emergency services" and removes the requirement that such services be in a non-Department facility. The bill explicitly defines "emergency services" to include both emergency treatment and emergency transportation. Emergency transportation is defined as use of an ambulance or air ambulance by a non-Department provider. This transportation can be to a facility for emergency treatment or from a non-Department facility to a Department or other Federal facility.
Yes· 3 of 11
- Scored +10
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?
Directly benefits veterans by ensuring reimbursement for emergency ambulance and air ambulance services.
- Scored +9
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?
Directly expands the scope of VA medical reimbursements to include emergency transport.
- Scored +8
Does this help veterans get medical care?
Expands reimbursement to include critical emergency transportation services for veterans.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
Increased reimbursements for emergency transportation may slightly increase federal spending.
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill expands the scope of reimbursable emergency services, likely increasing VA expenditures.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Reimbursement for emergency transport: Veterans may be reimbursed for the cost of ambulance or air ambulance services provided by non-Department providers, as stated in Section 2(a)(13)(C).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts for individuals or groups were explicitly stated in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Directly benefits veterans by ensuring reimbursement for emergency ambulance and air ambulance services. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Crucial for rural veterans who often require long-distance emergency transport to reach Federal facilities. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Reduces the out-of-pocket cost burden for low-income veterans needing emergency transport. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Veterans with disabilities may have a higher frequency of need for emergency medical transport. Would retired people be better off under this? — Many retirees are veterans who would benefit from expanded emergency transport reimbursement. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors are more likely to be veterans requiring emergency medical transport services. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides financial relief for veterans of middle-income status. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Provides benefit to any veteran regardless of income, though impact is less critical for high earners.
- Healthcare
- Does this help veterans get medical care? — Expands reimbursement to include critical emergency transportation services for veterans. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Increases financial accessibility for veterans needing emergency medical transport.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — Directly expands the scope of VA medical reimbursements to include emergency transport.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill expands the scope of reimbursable emergency services, likely increasing VA expenditures. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Increased reimbursements for emergency transportation may slightly increase federal spending.
- 6/23/2026
- Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
- 6/9/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Young KimRepublican · California
Joe NeguseDemocrat · Colorado