Talk:Veterans' Access to Care through Choice, Accountability, and Transparency Act of 2014

Last bullet point in "Provisions of the Bill"
The last bullet point in the Provisions section reads:

"The Act shifts the cost of the medical treatment and care to the veteran's private insurance plan[20] and the Veterans Administration now requires joining the Choice program as a condition of receiving medical care[21], although this change has not been published, evidently prompted by the dismal failure of the Act. Congressman Jeff Miller's House Committee report[22] anticipated a $200,000,000 recovery from veterans' private health plans, but with only 84,386 appointments made through the first six months of 2015[23], shifting the cost to the private sector has not been successful."

I have no idea what this means. Is this a provision or a commentary on the previous "choice" provision? What does it mean that this change has not been published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.92.132.37 (talk) 11:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Trump's False Claims
I added the paragraph on Trump claiming he created Veterans Choice because it seems relevant for this article. I wanted to get people's opinions on it being in this article. If you approve, say so under here. If you feel it is irrelevant then say why under here.--Excel23 (talk) 03:27, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The item is relevant and has plenty of citations. I offer the following though: The lead is a summary of the article and this subject is not mentioned anywhere in the body of the article. The reauthorization section may be appropriate as the actions are both by Trump. The item should be fleshed out in the article with most of the citations moving there. The summary in the lead can then be evaluated on the basis of a more extensive explanation in the body of the article. Cheers, Fettlemap (talk) 04:13, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. It should be moved to reauthorization and fleshed out. I'm unsure of it actually being in the summary to begin with even though I'm the one that put it there.--Excel23 (talk) 19:45, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The statement was removed on the grounds that it wasn't supported by its citations. I reviewed the citations and respectfully disagree, therefore I restored it. I removed two citations that weren't relevant to the statement, and I added an additional one that cites another, separate occurrence of the cited statement. I moved the statement to the re-authorization section as proposed above, and I tried to improve its wording, especially to make it less political in tone. All of this being said, I'm not convinced that the statement should remain. However, I do disagree with reason for its prior removal. This should be discussed further. Wernstrom (talk) 11:39, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Veterans mission act replaced veteran care act.....
The "Veterans' Access to Care through Choice, Accountability, and Transparency Act of 2014" was replace by the "Veterans Mission Act" in 2018... The legislation passed in the House on May 16 with a vote of 347-70. The Senate passed the bill on May 23 with a vote of 92-5. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) launched its new and improved Veterans Community Care Program on June 6, 2019, implementing portions of the VA Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act of 2018 (MISSION Act), which both ENDS the veterans choice program and establishes a new Veterans Community Care Program. & yes, the signature that officialized the act was that of Trumps...