SB 694’s harm is out in the open

Capitol Weekly welcomes Opinions on California public policy or politics. Please read our guidelines for opinion pieces before submitting an Op-Ed. Submissions that do not adhere to our guidelines will not be considered for publication. 

OPINION – As we begin 2026, California stands at a crossroads. Senate Bill 694, touted as a legislative shield to protect veterans from predatory practices, is once again moving forward as the Legislature reconvenes. But what was framed as protection has increasingly revealed itself lately as a bill that threatens to strip veterans of meaningful help, widen inequities, and weaken the community support systems many service members depend on to survive the VA benefits process.

For context, SB 694 aims to bar unaccredited individuals and companies from charging fees to assist veterans with Department of Veterans Affairs disability claims by expanding California’s consumer protection law. On its face, that sounds reasonable. But as scrutiny grows, it has become clear that the bill’s real-world consequences would be far more damaging than its supporters acknowledge.

What’s changed leading up to this January is awareness and dissemination of facts. More people are paying attention, and more alarms are being raised. Media outlets and legislators alike are beginning to question whether SB 694 actually helps veterans at all. A recent LA Sentinel editorial warned against eliminating veterans’ choice in how they seek assistance, noting that private consultants’ options are vital to helping receive their benefits in an already overwhelmed system.

Veterans don’t normally split on issues, we are usually united on all fronts, so why hasn’t there been a consensus on this bill that is supposed to “protect veterans”? Well, anyone who has actually gone through this process knows what a nightmare the VA can be and understands that we need all options available when we file for our individual cases.

There is another widely circulated opinion piece that went further, arguing that SB 694 would criminalize some of the most effective help veterans currently rely on, making those providers liable for prosecution and dramatically reducing support options for veterans already navigating a confusing and adversarial bureaucracy.

That concern is not hypothetical. Veterans and advocates across California are now speaking out, and many of us are from communities that already face disproportionate barriers to care. Critics point out that SB 694 severely limits who veterans can turn to for help at a time when accredited Veterans Service Officers are stretched beyond capacity. California has roughly 500 accredited representatives serving more than 1.5 million veterans,  an impossible ratio that leaves countless veterans waiting months or years for assistance.

But capacity is only part of the problem. SB 694 disproportionately harms veterans from minority communities and there has now been serious pushback in the news from the Black community. Black veterans, and especially Black women veterans, already experience lower approval rates for disability claims and greater difficulty navigating the VA system. These disparities are well documented and rooted in longstanding systemic inequities. By eliminating trusted, community-based helpers, SB 694 would widen those gaps, not close them like bill sponsors claim.

This growing opposition helps explain why SB 694 has not sailed through the Legislature as one would’ve expected. The more information that comes out, the harder it is to ignore the damage this bill would cause.

Veterans Service Organizations and county offices are already overwhelmed; removing supplemental support options will not protect veterans, it will leave them stranded. Civil liberties advocates have also raised concerns that SB 694 infringes on veterans’ right to choose how they seek help, raising constitutional questions that lawmakers should not dismiss lightly. And testimony from veterans, caregivers, and advocates across California has made one thing clear: this bill would cut off lifelines, not predatory actors, hitting rural, underserved, and minority communities the hardest.

This debate is not abstract for me. It reflects years of lived experience attending city council meetings, county supervisor hearings, and veterans’ forums from Imperial County to Sacramento. I have listened to disabled veterans, caregivers, and families describe how hard it is to navigate the VA, and how devastating it would be to lose the limited help they trust.

Lawmakers have an opportunity to stop SB 694 before it becomes law. The reconvening session is the moment to listen to veterans and the new information that has come out, examine real impacts rather than slogans, and pursue solutions that expand access instead of shrinking it.

California’s veterans deserve policies that honor their service, respect their autonomy, and ensure no one who wore the uniform is left to fight alone, in Sacramento or anywhere else.

Sky Ainsworth is an Army veteran and a lifelong advocate for veterans.