Jacky Rosen (D-NV)
Sergeant Dave Crete FORGOTTEN Veterans Act of 2026
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
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
This bill improves benefits and services for veterans who were exposed to toxic substances while serving at specific locations. It requires the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense to work together to identify affected veterans using military records and a new registry. The legislation establishes a presumption of toxic exposure and radiation-risk activities for veterans who served at locations like the Nevada Test and Training Range and facilities covered under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. Additionally, the bill mandates a comprehensive scientific study on toxic exposures and cancer risks tied to these covered locations. Finally, it requires the Secretary of Defense to formally classify these sites as contaminated locations and share relevant service records with the VA to help veterans receive the benefits they are legally entitled to.
Yes· 3 of 17
- Scored +9
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?
Extensively benefits veterans by removing the burden of proving toxic exposure, establishing disease presumptions, and creating a health registry.
- Scored +9
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?
The legislation establishes crucial presumptions of toxic exposure and radiation-risk activities, streamlining benefits and compensation for affected service members.
- Scored +8
Does this help veterans get medical care?
The bill significantly improves healthcare access and specialized medical benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances and radiation at specific test sites.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 3 ensures that the Department of Veterans Affairs cannot require a veteran to provide affirmative evidence of exposure to a specific toxic substance if their service at a covered location is already established. This makes it easier for veterans to get recognition without needing hard-to-find proof.
-
Section 4 treats service and participation at the Nevada Test and Training Range and the Nevada National Security Site as radiation-risk activities. This is beneficial because it helps qualifying veterans access specialized health care and benefits related to radiation exposure.
-
Section 5 creates a clear presumption of toxic exposure and service connection for certain diseases for veterans who were assigned to duty stations at Department of Energy facilities or the Nevada Test and Training Range and National Security Site. This positive provision helps veterans qualify for benefits without fighting through complicated bureaucratic hurdles to prove their illness came from their service.
-
Section 7 establishes a registry for veterans who served at covered locations to collect health information, help them coordinate with the VA and Department of Defense, and inform them of available health care, benefits, and screenings. This keeps veterans informed and connected to the support they have earned.
-
Section 8 requires the Secretary of Defense to classify specific test sites and facilities as locations where contamination occurred and mandates that the military make all efforts to identify exposed service members without forcing those members to submit stationing evidence. This protects veterans from unnecessary paperwork burdens.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Based on the provided text, there are no explicit sections or provisions that create negative consequences, burdens, or harms for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
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? — Extensively benefits veterans by removing the burden of proving toxic exposure, establishing disease presumptions, and creating a health registry. Would retired people be better off under this? — Extremely beneficial for retired military personnel dealing with long-term health consequences from service-related toxic exposures. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Aids older veterans who participated in historical nuclear and toxic testing programs by securing deserved medical benefits. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Benefits middle-aged veterans who served during periods of nuclear and toxic testing by simplifying disability claims. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Helps veterans suffering from disabilities and illnesses caused by toxic or radiation exposure obtain quicker relief. Would men be better off under this? — Supports male service members who were stationed at covered toxic test locations. Would women be better off under this? — Supports female service members who were stationed at covered toxic test locations. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Aids younger and future veterans who served in covered toxic test environments by easing claims processes. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Provides financial and medical support relief to veterans who may be struggling due to service-connected illnesses.
- Healthcare
- Does this help veterans get medical care? — The bill significantly improves healthcare access and specialized medical benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances and radiation at specific test sites. Does this put more money into medical research? — Mandates a comprehensive scientific study on toxic exposures and cancer risks tied to covered locations. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Enhanced health tracking and registry creation improve overall healthcare coordination for eligible veterans.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — The legislation establishes crucial presumptions of toxic exposure and radiation-risk activities, streamlining benefits and compensation for affected service members.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Initiates a formal scientific study on environmental hazards and cancer risks associated with military toxic exposures.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Requires the Secretary of Defense to formally classify specific test sites and facilities as contaminated locations.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Improves inter-agency data sharing between the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs regarding contamination and service records. Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal agency responsibilities in tracking and coordinating veteran toxic exposure records.
- 6/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/3/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Marsha BlackburnRepublican · Tennessee
Catherine Cortez MastoDemocrat · Nevada