Many of America's veterans have lived through horrors most citizens will never see.
—Some have lost limbs.
—Some have watched fellow soldiers die beside them.
—Others returned home carrying invisible wounds like PTSD, traumatic brain injuries, or rare cancers tied to toxic exposure.
For many of these men and women, disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) are not optional.
They are the financial foundation that allows veterans to pay medical bills, support their families, and rebuild their lives after service.
But accessing those benefits is far from simple.
The VA disability system is notoriously complex.
Claims require detailed documentation, strict procedural compliance, and a level of bureaucratic navigation that can overwhelm even the most organized applicants.
A single mistake can delay benefits for months or even years.
Because of this, many veterans seek help navigating the process.
Some rely on volunteer Veteran Service Organizations. Others turn to accredited attorneys when appealing decisions.
Increasingly, veterans are also choosing to work with paid consultants who specialize in helping them prepare and submit disability claims.
This growing demand for assistance has sparked a legislative battle playing out in Congress and across statehouses.
At the center of that debate are three competing approaches.
The CHOICE Act at the federal level and the SAVE Act in the states attempt to regulate the industry while preserving veterans' freedom to choose the kind of assistance they want.
These bills focus on transparency, fee caps, and consumer protections that prevent bad actors while still allowing veterans to seek professional help.
By contrast, the GUARD Act, introduced in both Congress and many state legislatures, takes a far more restrictive approach.
It assumes that non-accredited consultants are inherently predatory and seeks to eliminate or criminalize much of the private assistance veterans currently use.
Veterans absolutely deserve protection from fraud.
But eliminating an entire category of support does not solve the underlying problem: the VA system is still complicated, backlogged, and difficult to navigate.
States are beginning to recognize this.
Across the country, legislatures are increasingly favoring the regulatory model represented by SAVE-style legislation rather than GUARD-style prohibition.
In Virginia, lawmakers advanced HB 398, a version of the SAVE framework that establishes clear consumer protections while allowing veterans to continue working with consultants if they choose.
The bill prohibits misleading marketing, bans upfront fees before a claim is successful, and imposes caps on compensation.
Virginia’s competing GUARD-style bill, HB 1268, stalled in committee.
A similar pattern is unfolding in Missouri, where SB 974 regulates compensation and oversight for benefits consultants while preserving veterans’ ability to hire assistance. Meanwhile, Missouri's GUARD proposal, SB 1107, has struggled to gain traction.
Other states such as Mississippi, Connecticut, and Idaho are exploring similar regulatory approaches that balance oversight with access.
The trend is becoming clear.
Legislatures are moving toward policies that protect veterans while preserving their choices, not eliminating options entirely.
That makes it increasingly puzzling that many Democrats continue pushing GUARD-style legislation that has repeatedly stalled at both the federal and state levels.
California is one notable exception, where lawmakers advanced a GUARD-style bill after heavy pressure from federal officials urging the state to move the legislation forward.
Continuing to pursue the same failed approach year after year does not help veterans. It simply prolongs a policy stalemate while the underlying problem remains unsolved.
The reality is that veterans need more help navigating the VA system, not fewer avenues to find it.
The longer lawmakers argue over ideological approaches, the longer veterans remain stuck waiting for the assistance they need.
There is a clear workable middle ground.
Legislation like the CHOICE Act and SAVE Act demonstrates that it is possible to protect veterans from abuse while still respecting their independence and freedom to seek help.
Veterans fought for this country’s freedom. They should not lose their freedom of choice when they come home and try to access the benefits they earned.
If lawmakers are serious about helping veterans, they should stop reviving legislation that has already failed and start working together on solutions that expand access to help.
Because the longer Washington waits to find that middle ground, the longer America's veterans will continue to struggle through a system that was supposed to serve them.
George Landrith is president of the Frontiers of Freedom Institute and author of "Let Freedom Ring . . . Again: Can Self-Evident Truths Save America from Further Decline?" Read more George Landrith Insider articles — Click Here Now.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.