To amend title 10, United States Code, to eliminate the different treatment under the Survivor Benefit Plan accorded members of the reserve components who die from an injury or illness incurred or aggravated in the line of duty during inactive-duty training compared to members of the Armed Forces who die in the line of duty while on active duty.
Latest action. Referred to the subcommitteeA smaller panel inside a standing committee with jurisdiction over a slice of its subject matter. Most hearings and the first markup usually happen here.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) on Military Personnel.
Makes the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity for survivors of members of the reserves who die from an injury or illness incurred or aggravated in the line of duty during inactive-duty training the same as such annuity for survivors of members of the regular Armed Forces who die in the line of duty while on active duty. Provides the same increase with respect to the payment of an SBP annuity to a dependent child or children when there is no eligible surviving spouse.
Directs the Secretary of Defense (DOD) to adjust SBP payment amounts to reflect such changes.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Introduced in House" stage on April 26, 2013. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on May 6, 2013: Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 113th Congress (2013-14), 296 of the 9,091 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 3.3 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) introduced it on April 26, 2013, and 11 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 5 Democrats, 6 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on April 26, 2013, 4885 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 4875 days ago, on May 6, 2013.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 113th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2015 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers