Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
The bill adds section 2517 to Title 14, U.S. Code, requiring the Coast Guard to retain certain enlisted members who have completed at least 18 but less than 20 years of service until they qualify for retirement. For Regular members who would otherwise be involuntarily separated or denied reenlistment and are within two years of retirement eligibility, the member must be retained on active duty until retirement eligibility (unless retired/discharged sooner under other law).
Liberal emphasizes retirement security and morale benefits
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear, narrowly scoped substantive change to Coast Guard personnel law by adding a statutory retention requirement for enlisted members with 18 to less than 20 years of service and provides concrete timing rules, but it omits fiscal, procedural, and oversight detail that would be expected to fully support implementation.
The bill adds section 2517 to Title 14, U.S. Code, requiring the Coast Guard to retain certain enlisted members who have completed at least 18 but less than 20 years of service until they qualify for retirement.
For Regular members who would otherwise be involuntarily separated or denied reenlistment and are within two years of retirement eligibility, the member must be retained on active duty until retirement eligibility (unless retired/discharged sooner under other law).
For Reserve members on active status in the same service window, discharge or transfer without the member's consent is prohibited until either they reach 20 years of service or a specified 2–3 year anniversary period.
Substantively modest and noncontroversial so plausible, but standalone bills with small fiscal effects often stall unless folded into broader defense or coast guard authorizations.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear, narrowly scoped substantive change to Coast Guard personnel law by adding a statutory retention requirement for enlisted members with 18 to less than 20 years of service and provides concrete timing rules, but it omits fiscal, procedural, and oversight detail that would be expected to fully support implementation.
Liberal emphasizes retirement security and morale benefits
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberal emphasizes retirement security and morale benefits
This persona will likely view the bill positively as a targeted protection for service members near retirement, preserving earned benefits.
It is seen as a fairness and labor-protection measure that prevents sudden loss of retirement eligibility and supports veterans' economic security.
A moderate will generally support the bill's fairness goal but want clarity on cost, manpower effects, and operational impacts.
They see benefits in protecting retirement eligibility while wanting guardrails to limit unintended readiness or budgetary problems.
A mainstream conservative will be mixed: sympathetic to protecting veterans but concerned about costs and reduced managerial flexibility.
They will question mandatory retention that may interfere with force structure, budget discipline, or efficient personnel management.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantively modest and noncontroversial so plausible, but standalone bills with small fiscal effects often stall unless folded into broader defense or coast guard authorizations.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberal emphasizes retirement security and morale benefits
Substantively modest and noncontroversial so plausible, but standalone bills with small fiscal effects often stall unless folded into broad…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear, narrowly scoped substantive change to Coast Guard personnel law by adding a statutory retention requirement for enlisted members with 18 to less…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.