Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The bill amends the Communications Act of 1934 to require providers of certain covered services to charge veterans’ organizations the residential rate for service delivered at the property where the organization primarily operates, if that residential rate is lower than the normal organizational/commercial rate. Covered services are defined as cable service and voice service (excluding commercial mobile service).
Liberals emphasize veterans’ nonprofit relief and inclusion expansion.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive statutory amendment that creates a new billing obligation on providers and reasonably integrates with existing statutory definitions, but it provides only minimal procedural and enforcement detail.
The bill amends the Communications Act of 1934 to require providers of certain covered services to charge veterans’ organizations the residential rate for service delivered at the property where the organization primarily operates, if that residential rate is lower than the normal organizational/commercial rate.
Covered services are defined as cable service and voice service (excluding commercial mobile service).
A veterans’ organization is any organization recognized by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under 38 U.S.C. 5902.
Narrow, low‑cost appearing bill with sympathetic beneficiary group improves prospects, but regulatory impact on telecoms and lack of enforcement details raise obstacles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive statutory amendment that creates a new billing obligation on providers and reasonably integrates with existing statutory definitions, but it provides only minimal procedural and enforcement detail.
Liberals emphasize veterans’ nonprofit relief and inclusion expansion.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize veterans’ nonprofit relief and inclusion expansion.
Likely supportive because it reduces operating costs for VA-recognized veterans’ organizations and increases access to communications.
Views it as a modest regulatory step to help nonprofit service providers serving veterans.
May press to extend scope to mobile and broadband and to guard against cost-shifting to low-income households.
Modestly favorable as a narrow, targeted measure helping veterans’ organizations, while acknowledging tradeoffs.
Sees the bill as small-scale regulatory relief but wants analysis of economic effects and administrative costs.
Would favor precise rules, verification, and limited scope to avoid unintended market distortions.
Skeptical because it directs private providers to alter pricing, amounting to government-imposed price discrimination.
While sympathetic to veterans’ organizations, prefers voluntary discounts or direct assistance instead of regulatory mandates.
Concerned about market distortion, cost-shifting, and regulatory burden on providers.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, low‑cost appearing bill with sympathetic beneficiary group improves prospects, but regulatory impact on telecoms and lack of enforcement details raise obstacles.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize veterans’ nonprofit relief and inclusion expansion.
Narrow, low‑cost appearing bill with sympathetic beneficiary group improves prospects, but regulatory impact on telecoms and lack of enforc…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive statutory amendment that creates a new billing obligation on providers and reasonably integrates with existing statutory definitions,…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.