RELATIONS REPORT For the Win! The Inside Story of How the Auto Act Became Law

By Amy Schoppman DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS & PUBLIC POLICY

would loudly announce to nobody in particular that I was headed to “the office” (my bedroom) and was not to be disturbed. After applying a wellworn set of Lee Press-On Nails that I’d swiped from my mom’s vanity table, I would click my cherry red fingernails on my desk as I reviewed accounts payable (the mail), finalized contracts (did my homework), and composed Post-It Notes reminding my administrative assistant (little sister) to please stop eating the food I put in the breakroom refrigerator. I would also produce weekly Trapper Keeper-bound reports on The Turlington Company’s various projects, using my recently-acquired knowledge of 5W1H—Who, What, Where, When, Why (and sometimes How)—to summarize the company’s activities for its stakeholders (my G.I. Joe and Barbie Doll collection).

When Congress passed The Veterans Auto and Education Improvement Act of 2022 three days before Christmas, I realized that my long hours at The Turlington Company could prove useful in summarizing our legislative victory. After contemplating my approach to this cover story over the holidays, I drew upon my early reporting experience, dusted off some acrylic nails, and composed this (slightly modified) 5W1H summary to convey the history, context, and impact of this significant new law.

WHAT happened?

We’ll begin with the end: on January 5, 2023, President Biden signed The Veterans Auto and Education Improvement Act into law. Several auto mobility industry-related provisions were incorporated into this bill, specifically:

Authorization for VA to provide an additional auto grant to eligible veterans if 30 years have passed since they received their first auto grant (and in 2033, that timeframe decreases to 10 years). In other words, the VA auto grant is no longer a oncein-a-lifetime benefit.

A requirement that VA’s definition of “medical services” be updated to include certain vehicle modifications (specifically “van lifts, raised doors, raised roofs, air conditioning, and wheelchair tiedowns for passenger use”) offered through the AAE program. The agency has not been statutorily required to provide such services, and the intent here was to protect and codify VA AAE benefits for nonservice-connected veterans. The designation of nonarticulating trailers designed to transport powered wheelchairs, powered scooters, or other similar mobility devices as “adaptive equipment,” which will allow VA to officially permit the purchase and installation of such products (including Bruno’s Chariot).

The bill’s passage was the culmination of a multi-year effort that included an education and awareness campaign, several hearings, and careful navigation of the frequently fickle legislative process. We’ll get into those details shortly.

WHY was NMEDA involved?

Conversations with Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) regarding the auto grant and nonservice connected provisions above have been occurring for years. In addition to the obvious alignment with NMEDA’s mission to increase transportation opportunities for people with disabilities, I welcomed the chance to again partner with PVA on a post-Veterans Mobility Safety Act (VMSA) legislative effort. Their influence on Capitol Hill, coupled with their highly capable staff and what we viewed as a favorable political climate, made the decision to collaborate an easy one. Another contributing factor was the wonderfully uncomplicated nature of our fundamental position: the average useful lifespan of a new motor vehicle is approximately 11 years, and the frequency of the auto grant should keep pace with the practical reality of vehicle ownership and maintenance.

A final—and central—factor motivating this initiative was reports from both

WHO contributed to the effort?

NMEDA provided essential industry data, editorial review of legislative language and Congressional testimony, and support educating members of Congress during the cosponsor recruitment phase, but PVA was the indisputable—and indefatigable—leader of this initiative, organizations’ members. NMEDA members shared with me instances of veterans continuing to use vehicles that were unsafe, unreliable, or that no longer met their functional needs because they were unable to independently finance a replacement. Morgan Brown, PVA’s National Legislative Director who spearheaded this effort, received similar reports. “Surveys indicated that what our members really needed was help buying a vehicle. One veteran, who was driving a 42 year old van with half a million miles on it, was repeatedly paying out of pocket for inevitable repairs and maintenance. A considerable number of others reported driving old vehicles with significant wear and tear because they couldn’t afford to make a down payment on a replacement. This feedback made us want to engage Congress right away.” which was originally considered during a February 2020 House hearing just before COVID sidelined an overwhelming majority of planned Congressional business. Undeterred, the proposal was reintroduced at the start of the 117th Congress in 2021. Longtime NMEDA member Bruno Independent Living Aids also launched a separate initiative to secure classification of their Chariot product as “automobile adaptive equipment.” At the time, that product was classified as a “trailer”—which VA is not technically authorized to purchase for veteran use—and Bruno’s position was that VA’s misclassification of the Chariot was limiting veterans’ options for transporting heavier powered mobility devices. Chuck Beno, Bruno’s Director of Sales, had been meeting with VA for years, explaining that the Chariot was technically a “lift” and could fill a void in the market, particularly for veterans driving smaller SUVs, sedans, and other vehicles with lower hitch tongue weight ratings. “Eventually the Secretary told us we would need to go the legislative route to get it done. We knew that approach would be a tough path, but we decided to go for it,” Beno recalls.

(AUTO) for Veterans Act occurred relatively quickly (3,304th) given that it had already been written, sponsored, and introduced during the previous session of Congress.

Committee Referral

Fantasy: Once introduced, a bill is referred to a Committee (in AUTO’s case, the House and Senate VA expected was one Veteran Service Organization’s full-throated objection to the mini auto grant provision based on their position that the auto grant was established to assist servicedisabled veterans and any expansion of eligibility beyond that cohort would drive up costs and cannibalize the program. AUTO would’ve died in Committee if we hadn’t dropped the mini auto grant provision, which we reluctantly did.

Legislative Purgatory

Fantasy: This phase never occurs.

HOW did the process unfold?

This may be best communicated by detailing how the process is supposed to unfold vs. how it actually unfolded.

Introduction

Fantasy: An idea is proposed, a bill is written, sponsors (at least one in the House and one in the Senate) are secured, the bill is filed by being placed into something literally called “the hopper” (a special box on the side of the Clerk’s desk) and, once the bill is assigned a number, it is considered “introduced.”

Reality: Bills are introduced all the time—17,812 times in this last Congress, to be precise—and address all manner of issues. The Horse Transportation Safety Act? Check. The Baby Switching Prevention Act?

Real. The Murder Hornet Eradiation Act? That happened. Point being, this is typically the “easy” part, and introduction of the Advancing Uniform Transportation Opportunities

Committees) for review and potential revision. If you’re lucky, your bill gets a hearing, is minimally revised, and is eventually sent to the full chamber for a vote.

Reality: AUTO was introduced with the expectation that it would get a hearing—the groundwork had been laid with the House VA Committee’s Chairman, Ranking Member, and Committee staff—and that’s exactly what happened in April 2021. AUTO’s initial legislative language was ambitious: we were pursuing (1) the increased frequency (every 10 years) of the Auto Grant for service-connected veterans, (2) the establishment of a “mini” auto grant (25% of the traditional grant, or $5,372.07) for non-service connected veterans, and (3) the definitional update of “Medical Services.” During the hearing, the ranking Republican mentioned his budgetary concerns (code for “this proposal is expensive”), but that acknowledgement was expected. Less

Reality: This phase almost always occurs. Unless your bill is addressing a matter of urgent national concern (the Families First Coronavirus Response Act went from bill to law in seven days), or is a real crowd pleaser (the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act to protect consumers from unwanted telemarketing went from bill to law in six weeks), it will likely languish in this intermediate state. This is also where you’ll typically encounter the Congressional Grim Reaper, aka the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which “scores” bills based on their economic and budgetary impact. A bill’s score (generally the lower the better) is a huge factor in its ultimate success and, with an initial CBO score of several billion dollars, AUTO’s primary purgatory-phase challenge was to demonstrate that, while costly, the proposal was necessary. After examining the analysis used to arrive at the initial score, it was discovered that CBO hadn’t taken ALS veterans [who will likely not pursue subsequent Auto Grants] into consideration.

Recalculations were made, auto grant eligibility timeframes were adjusted, and negotiators eventually reached an acceptable score by adding the “if

30 years have passed…” language. An unfavorable initial budgetary forecast represents a real danger, but AUTO ultimately dodged CBO’s scythe and lived to see another day.

Votes

Fantasy: Your bill, which has not been consolidated with any other bills or modified with any outside legislative language, is passed by simple majority vote. The other chamber quickly follows suit.

Reality: Congress has this super annoying tendency to make lastminute deals, and AUTO was no exception. With the anticipated lateDecember voting frenzy approaching, a decision was made to insert AUTO’s language into the Student Veteran Emergency Relief Act, which was expected to pass both chambers. This was also the legislative vehicle chosen by Bruno’s team, who worked with Senator Susan Collins to insert the “nonarticulating trailer” language. It is challenging to satisfy all stakeholders when consolidating proposals, especially under time constraints, but it is exceptionally challenging to secure inclusion in a viable of other organizations and interests are jockeying for their own inclusion. Fortunately, our preparation paid off—lawmakers had been educated on the proposal, they understood its purpose and importance, their fiscal and VA contacts to facilitate timely implementation.

WHERE can I find the latest information?

NMEDA’s communications channels— concerns had been mollified, and they were ultimately not willing to exclude provisions directly benefiting both service- and non-service connected veterans. In a less than 48-hour period in late December, the House and Senate both passed what had mutated into the Veterans Auto and Education Improvement Act (which was one of only 347 of the aforementioned 17,812 bills to cross the finish line). “Things happen very quickly in end-of-Congress situations. Usually it’s something bad, but that was not the case this time. To have this bill pass, and so quickly, is a Godsend,” said Brown. Amen!

WHEN will the changes go into effect?

Ideally, by the start of the government’s next fiscal year (October 1, 2023). VA’s Implementation Team met in midJanuary and will need some time to update procedures, adjust forms, and educate staff as this effort transitions from legislative fantasy to bureaucratic reality. The stakeholders mentioned in this article are also using their Congressional allies the GR blog, this magazine, our weekly Short Circuit emails, and social media—will provide implementation updates, and readers should feel free to contact me directly with questions or comments. We will also keep members apprised of new legislative activity. My PVA counterparts and I have already discussed embracing our current momentum and pursuing an increase in the baseline amount of the auto grant or revisiting the notion of a non-service-connected auto grant. And there you have it. While this was a bit more detailed than my childhood 5W1H summaries it was, in my defense, also the first time I prepared one for a sentient audience. The bottom line is: NMEDA isn’t playing pretend on Capitol Hill, our partnerships are not makebelieve, and our legislative advocacy results are 100% more real than The Turlington Company. Happy New Year, indeed.

Some things come easier than others, and this particular piece has been the toughest ever. A truly “Captain Obvious” moment would say that no matter how long you stare at a blank screen and no matter how much you will that those incredibly relevant words would just pop up, all you have is a blank screen.

Of more relevance is when Katie, NMEDA’s Director of Communications and editor of this magazine, so politely reminds me that I am now several days past the final deadline and the screen is still blank, well necessity does become the mother of the written word.

There were so many obvious subjects worth noting, Danny’s resignation, for one. I was not really sure how I felt about that, happy for Danny if that was what Danny wanted—not so happy for the Association as a whole that has very much thrived and matured under his tutelage. Most notably during last spring’s strategic planning session and the way that session evolved as the primary tool that would drive the Association’s direction for the next period of time. The process was brilliant, the resulting plan, bold and exciting.