PDF(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)Tip?
116th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 116-259
======================================================================
VETERAN TREATMENT COURT COORDINATION ACT OF 2019
_______
October 28, 2019.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Nadler, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 886]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 886) to direct the Attorney General to establish and
carry out a Veteran Treatment Court Program, having considered
the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and
recommend that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 4
Committee Consideration.......................................... 4
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures and Congressional
Budget Office Cost Estimate.................................... 4
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 4
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 5
Advisory on Earmarks............................................. 5
Section-by-Section Analysis...................................... 5
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 886, the ``Veteran Treatment Court Coordination Act of
2019,'' directs the Attorney General to permanently establish a
grant-program office, called the Veteran Treatment Court
Program (VTCP), to administer veterans court grants that the
Department of Justice (DOJ) awards to state, local, and tribal
governments. The VTCP would build upon the success of the
hundreds of veterans courts programs in the United States by
standardizing data reporting methods, serving as a repository
for resources, providing training to veterans court
administrators, and serving as the DOJ subject matter experts
on veterans courts issues.
Background and Need for the Legislation
In 2008, New York State City Court Judge Robert T. Russell,
Jr. established the first veterans court program in Buffalo,
New York,\1\ to leverage veteran-defendants' service
backgrounds and improve justice outcomes.\2\ Judge Russell
focused his efforts on issues that disproportionately impact
veterans, including substance abuse, homelessness,
unemployment, and mental health concerns.\3\ Veterans courts
divert justice-involved veterans charged with certain crimes
from traditional misdemeanor and felony dockets to specialty
courts that focus on rehabilitation of the defendant-veteran
through the provision of individualized treatment. There are
now over 500 veterans courts in the nation.\4\ Most veterans
courts promote a coordinated response to address the issues
that may underlie a veteran's alleged criminal behavior.\5\
Some veterans courts adopt restorative justice treatment models
and encourage the veteran-defendant to promote rehabilitation
among their peer participants.\6\ To qualify for most veterans
courts, evidence of an underlying service-connected mental
health condition is usually required.\7\ In a majority of
veterans courts, the prosecutor, the judge, and defense counsel
facilitate counseling or the provision of other services by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Dahlia Lithwick, A Separate Peace: Why Veterans Deserve Special
Courts, Newsweek, Feb. 22, 2010, at 20, https://www.newsweek.com/why-
veterans-deserve-special-courts75257.
\2\ Robert T. Russell, Veterans Treatment Court: A Proactive
Approach, 35 New Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 357, 360-61
(2009), https://www.american.edu/spa/jpo/initiatives/drug-court/upload/
veterans-treatment-court-a-proactive-approach.pdf.
\3\ Id. at 358-60.
\4\ U.S. Dep't of Veterans Affs., Veterans Treatment Courts and
Other Veteran-Focused Courts Served by VA Veterans Justice Outreach
Specialists (Aug. 2018), https://www.va.gov/HOMELESS/docs/VJO/2018-
Veterans-Treatment-Courts-FactSheet-508.pdf.
\5\ Nat'l Inst. of Corrs., U.S. Dep't of Just., Veterans Treatment
Courts: A Second Chance for Vets who have Lost their Way 11 (May 2016),
https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/030018.pdf.
\6\ Julie Marie Baldwin & Joseph Rukus, Healing the Wounds: An
Examination
of Veterans Treatment Courts in the Context of Restorative Justice,
Crim.
Just. Pol'y Rev., Vol. 26(2) 183-207 (2015), http://
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/
download?doi=10.1.1.850.9303&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
\7\ Joseph Darius Jaafari, Special Courts for Veterans Languish,
The Marshall Project (Feb. 19, 2019 6:00 AM), https://
www.themarshallproject.org/2019/02/19/special-courts-for-veterans-
languish.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS SUPPORT TO VETERANS
COURTS
Shortly after Judge Russell inaugurated the first veterans
court, the VA began providing health support to veterans courts
programs through its Veteran Justice Outreach (VJO) program.\8\
The support provided by the VA includes a consultant to the
court called a VJO specialist, who serves on the veterans court
treatment team, coordinates the provision of health care
services, answers questions posed by the court, and assists the
legal teams. The VJO specialist matches the defendant-veteran
to programs that may assist the veteran on the road to
recovery, which in the majority of cases starts with substance
abuse or mental health treatment. The VA now offers a number of
treatment options that are available to veterans court
participants including, mentoring sessions, mental health
counseling, substance abuse treatment, housing services, and
vocational counseling.\9\ VJO specialists do not set guidelines
for veterans court participation nor do they direct which
defendants should be accepted into the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See U.S. Dep't of Veterans Aff., Veterans Treatment Courts.
\9\ K. J. Knudsen & S. Wingenfeld, A Specialized Treatment Court
for Veterans with Trauma Exposure: Implications for the Field.
Community Mental Health J. 52(2), 127-35 (2016), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s10597-015-9845-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. NEED FOR SPECIALIZED VETERANS SERVICES
One study reports that approximately nine percent of
veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan have been arrested
since returning home.\10\ The Bureau of Justice Statistics
(BJS) estimates that approximately 181,500 veterans were
incarcerated in state and federal prison and jail in 2011-
2012.\11\ Of those incarcerated veterans surveyed by BJS, 48%
of veterans in prison and 55% of veterans in jail reported that
they had been told by a mental health professional that they
had a mental health disorder.\12\ BJS found that the number of
incarcerated veterans who had seen combat who reported mental
health disorders was even higher--60% in prison and 67% in
jail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Eric B. Elbogen et al., Criminal Justice Involvement, Trauma,
and Negative Affect in Iraq and Afghanistan War Era Veterans, J.
Consult Clin. Psychol. 80(6): 1097-1102 (Dec. 2012), https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3514623/.
\11\ Jennifer Bronsom et al., Veterans in Prison and Jail, 2011-12,
Bur. of Just. Stats., U.S. Dep't of Just. (Dec. 2015), https://
www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vpj1112.pdf.
\12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. VETERANS COURT LIMITATIONS & EFFECTIVENESS
In 2017, a National Institute of Corrections survey of 79
veterans court programs found that a majority of programs had
modest enrollment (usually only 1-20 concurrent participants);
76% of surveyed programs automatically exclude veterans charged
with sex offenses; nearly 50% of veterans courts exclude
veterans charged with violent offenses; and 45% of programs
disqualify veterans previously convicted of violent
offenses.\13\ By adopting policies that limit programs to
nonviolent offenders, veterans courts may be excluding 64% of
justice-involved veterans.\14\ Because veterans courts program
adopt different standards and treatment programs, collecting
uniform data, data reporting, and evaluating best practices is
difficult.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Nat'l Inst. of Corrs., U.S. Dep't of Just., Veterans Treatment
Courts: Identifying Key Findings from a Collaborative Survey (Mar.
2017), https://info.nicic.gov/jiv/sites/info.nicic.gov.jiv/files/
Treatment-Court-Survey.pdf.
\14\ Bronsom et al., at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Empirical studies show that veterans courts provide more
effective means of rehabilitating justice-involved veterans
than traditional criminal prosecutions. Although 20% of
veterans court participants received jail sanctions during the
program, only 14% experienced a new incarceration during an
average of nearly one year in the program.\15\ This rate of
recidivism is substantially less than the 23%-46% one-year
recidivism rate found among non-veteran prisoners.\16\ Most
programs reported less than five dropouts in the 2017 calendar
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Jack Tsai et al., A National Study of Veterans Treatment Court
Participants: Who Benefits and Who Recidivates, Adm. Pol'y Mental
Health. 45(2): 236-244 (Mar. 2018), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
articles/PMC5776060/.
\16\ M.R. Durose et al., Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30
States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010. Bur. of Just. Stats, U.S
Dep't of Just (Apr. 2014), http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/
rprts05p0510.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearings
The Committee held no hearings on H.R. 886.
Committee Consideration
On October 16, 2019, the Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, H.R. 886, favorably reported, without
amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that no
rollcall votes occurred during the Committee's consideration of
H.R. 886.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures and Congressional Budget
Office Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested
but not received a cost estimate for this Report from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office. The Committee has
requested but not received from the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office a statement as to whether this
Report contains any new budget authority, spending authority,
credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax
expenditures.
Duplication of Federal Programs
No provision of H.R. 886 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal government known to be duplicative of
another federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
Performance Goals and Objectives
The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R.
886 would centralize administration of veterans court grants
that DOJ awards to state, local, and tribal governments in a
single program office. H.R. 886 would ease administration of
currently authorized veterans court programs and facilitate the
assessment of best practices.
Advisory on Earmarks
In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, H.R. 886 does not contain any
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The following discussion describes the bill as reported by
the Committee.
Sec 1. Short title. Section 1 sets forth the short title of
the bill as the ``Veteran Treatment Court Coordination Act of
2019.''
Sec 2. Sense of Congress. Section 2 sets forth the sense of
Congress that veterans treatment courts provide successful
interventions for nonviolent justice-involved veterans.
Sec 3. Veteran Treatment Court Program. Section 3 directs
the Attorney General to establish a Veteran Court Treatment
Program that will serve as the Department's focal point to
provide grants and technical assistance to state court systems
that have adopted a veterans court program or filed an intent
to do so. This section also incorporates existing veterans
court programs administered by the Attorney General into the
new program and authorizes the Attorney General to promulgate
regulations to carry out the newly established program.
