Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Court Orders Ao Presumptive Rules To Be Published

Rate this question


SgtAFMOB

Question

The twitter site for www.vawatchdog.org announced an hour ago that The US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order July the 15th that requires the VA Secretary to publish the new rule or an interium rule by noon Monday the 19th. The alternative is to appear and explain why not. This suit was brought by the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the NVLSP, and three other advocacy organizations. Suggest interested parties read the full account at Vawatchdog. Let the fur fly!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 17
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder

A Writ to make the Secretary act. He will have to publish them and the court order will take precedence over Webb.

Good Job PVA.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So.....if the secretary signs the final rule, does that mean it is a done deal and Senator Webb's requested review will NOT happen and the VA can then begin paying out on the claims?

I think the secretary is not the problem, I think this is a way around Webb and git r done, so to speak...

Hoooo Raaaa

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oldtimer is right:

But the publication of the regs could be the Secretary's response.

(I think VA is working overtime in DC this weekend trying to figure out what to do)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So.....if the secretary signs the final rule, does that mean it is a done deal and Senator Webb's requested review will NOT happen and the VA can then begin paying out on the claims?

I think the secretary is not the problem, I think this is a way around Webb and git r done, so to speak...

Hoooo Raaaa

Bob

No, that is not correct. Once the Secretary signs the final rule, it is then published in the Federal Register. On the date it is published in the Federal Register after the Secretary signs off on it, it then becomes a major rule. A major rule is one that would have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or have certain other impacts. This rulemaking has been determined to be a major rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) and must be reviewed by Congress for a 60-day period.

Senator Webb's requested review is, in fact, the Congressional Review Act being invoked. The question here, is whether the CRA can be invoked quicker than Webb's review hearing, so as to eat up more time on the 60 day clock. There can be only one 60 day review. The fact that Senator Webb has announced a hearing on this proposed new rule is totally meaningless. The congressional 60-day review period would still have had to be invoked.

History has shown the Congressional Review Act to be more symbolic than anything else. It has been in existence for 13 years and has been invoked twice. One time was a success and one time was a failure. The time that it was a success was when a new President came into office. The CRA is more suited to presidential adminstrations just coming into office, than one that has already been in place for a year or more.

So, to make a long story short, we should hope the new rule becomes final and published in the Federal Register so as to start the Congressional Review Act (CRA) as quickly as possible, so as to get it over with. If, by some miracle, the 60 day CRA clock could be started and ended before the Senator's hearing, then his hearing would be a total waste of time.

But, in any case, I really would not worry that much about the Senator's hearing or the CRA. History is on the side of the administration here, and not Congress.

Edited by JRW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

"The alternative is to appear and explain why not"

That's what the VA pays lawyers for. There will "more likely than not" be more than one or two cycles of the VA lawyers appearing,saying something, and getting a continuance. After all, it's a governmental agency. <G>

The twitter site for www.vawatchdog.org announced an hour ago that The US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order July the 15th that requires the VA Secretary to publish the new rule or an interium rule by noon Monday the 19th. The alternative is to appear and explain why not. This suit was brought by the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the NVLSP, and three other advocacy organizations. Suggest interested parties read the full account at Vawatchdog. Let the fur fly!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that is not correct. Once the Secretary signs the final rule, it is then published in the Federal Register. On the date it is published in the Federal Register after the Secretary signs off on it, it then becomes a major rule. A major rule is one that would have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or have certain other impacts. This rulemaking has been determined to be a major rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) and must be reviewed by Congress for a 60-day period.

Senator Webb's requested review is, in fact, the Congressional Review Act being invoked. The question here, is whether the CRA can be invoked quicker than Webb's review hearing, so as to eat up more time on the 60 day clock. There can be only one 60 day review. The fact that Senator Webb has announced a hearing on this proposed new rule is totally meaningless. The congressional 60-day review period would still have had to be invoked.

History has shown the Congressional Review Act to be more symbolic than anything else. It has been in existence for 13 years and has been invoked twice. One time was a success and one time was a failure. The time that it was a success was when a new President came into office. The CRA is more suited to presidential adminstrations just coming into office, than one that has already been in place for a year or more.

So, to make a long story short, we should hope the new rule becomes final and published in the Federal Register so as to start the Congressional Review Act (CRA) as quickly as possible, so as to get it over with. If, by some miracle, the 60 day CRA clock could be started and ended before the Senator's hearing, then his hearing would be a total waste of time.

But, in any case, I really would not worry that much about the Senator's hearing or the CRA. History is on the side of the administration here, and not Congress.

Thanks for your summary JRW as you did on the other forum, both are the most logical presentations on the subject matter. I found the rule at OMB before the proposed rule was published and it had been there since December, now we have it at OMB again. I could not find a double review in the process and wondered why court ordered time frames were not being adhered to then. The NVLSP proposed suit moved the rule to the proposed rule stage. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use