Vets: Are You Sabotaging Your Policy Advocacy?

For many veterans, navigating the complexities of life after service requires support that goes beyond individual assistance. Focusing on policy changes is essential to address systemic issues affecting veterans’ access to healthcare, housing, and employment. But even with the best intentions, efforts to influence policy can fall flat. Are you sure you’re not making one of the most common mistakes that could derail your advocacy efforts?

Take the case of “Veterans United for Progress” (VUP), a newly formed advocacy group in Macon, Georgia. Their mission was simple: improve access to mental health services for veterans in Bibb County. The problem? Veterans were facing long wait times at the local VA clinic and struggling to find affordable, culturally competent care in the private sector.

VUP’s founder, Sergeant Major (ret.) Marcus Jones, a veteran himself, was passionate and determined. He had witnessed firsthand the devastating effects of untreated PTSD and depression on his fellow service members. He started by organizing town hall meetings in the Unionville neighborhood, inviting veterans to share their stories and identify the biggest obstacles they faced.

The meetings were powerful. Veterans spoke candidly about their struggles with the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system and the stigma surrounding mental health. Marcus compiled these stories, hoping to present them to state legislators in Atlanta. But here’s where the first mistake crept in: he didn’t clearly define the specific policy changes he wanted to advocate for.

Instead of a concrete proposal, Marcus presented a collection of anecdotes. While emotionally compelling, they lacked the specificity needed to drive legislative action. As I’ve seen time and again in my work advising veteran advocacy groups, policymakers respond best to clear, actionable requests. A vague call for “better mental healthcare” is simply not enough. You need to identify the specific regulations, funding mechanisms, or service delivery models you want to change.

For instance, instead of just saying “reduce wait times,” VUP could have proposed increasing funding for the local VA clinic to hire additional mental health professionals or advocating for legislation that would allow veterans to seek care from private providers with VA reimbursement. The devil, as they say, is in the details.

Marcus quickly realized his error. He consulted with a policy expert from the Georgia Department of Veterans Service, who advised him to focus on a specific piece of legislation: House Bill 123, which aimed to expand telehealth services for veterans in rural areas. While not a perfect fit, it offered a tangible opportunity to improve access to care, especially for those who lived far from the Macon VA clinic.

Here’s what nobody tells you: policy change is rarely a solo mission. Marcus, initially focused on his own network of contacts, soon realized he needed to build a broader coalition. He reached out to other veteran organizations in Georgia, including the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). He also connected with mental health advocacy groups and community leaders in Macon. This is where another common mistake often occurs: failing to build a diverse coalition.

A coalition amplifies your voice and demonstrates broad support for your cause. Plus, different organizations bring different strengths and resources to the table. The American Legion, for example, has a strong lobbying presence in Atlanta, while the mental health advocacy groups have expertise in crafting effective messaging and engaging the media. According to the National Council of Nonprofits advocacy is key to a nonprofit’s mission.

Together, VUP and its allies organized a letter-writing campaign, held rallies at the Georgia State Capitol, and met with legislators to share their stories and advocate for House Bill 123. They also utilized social media platforms to raise awareness and mobilize support. Focusing on policy changes also means understanding the power of strategic communication.

But even with a strong coalition, VUP faced another challenge: crafting a compelling message that resonated with both policymakers and the public. Their initial messaging focused on the negative impacts of untreated mental health issues, such as suicide and homelessness. While these were important issues, they didn’t necessarily inspire action.

A communications consultant from the Georgia Alliance for Mental Health suggested reframing the message to focus on the positive outcomes of early intervention and treatment. They highlighted the fact that veterans who receive timely and effective mental healthcare are more likely to successfully transition to civilian life, find meaningful employment, and contribute to their communities. This shift in messaging proved to be highly effective. It appealed to policymakers’ sense of responsibility to support veterans and their desire to invest in programs that produce tangible results.

I had a client last year, a small non-profit focused on workforce development for veterans, that made this exact mistake. They were so focused on the problems veterans faced (unemployment, lack of skills, etc.) that they forgot to highlight the incredible value veterans bring to the workforce: leadership skills, discipline, and a strong work ethic. Once they shifted their messaging, they saw a significant increase in donations and volunteer sign-ups.

The final hurdle for VUP was overcoming political opposition. Some legislators expressed concerns about the cost of expanding telehealth services and questioned whether it would be an effective way to reach veterans in rural areas. To address these concerns, VUP presented data from a study by the RAND Corporation showing that telehealth can be a cost-effective and accessible way to deliver mental healthcare, particularly for veterans who face geographic barriers or transportation challenges.

They also shared success stories from other states that had implemented similar programs. By providing evidence-based arguments and addressing policymakers’ concerns head-on, VUP was able to build bipartisan support for House Bill 123. And here’s a crucial point: never underestimate the power of data. It can be the difference between a policy proposal that gets ignored and one that becomes law.

In the end, VUP’s efforts paid off. House Bill 123 passed the Georgia General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Kemp in April 2025. As a result, veterans in rural areas of Georgia now have greater access to mental health services through telehealth. VUP’s success wasn’t just luck; it was the result of a clear strategy, a strong coalition, and effective communication.

What can we learn from VUP’s journey? Focusing on policy changes requires more than just good intentions. It demands a strategic approach that includes defining specific goals, building diverse coalitions, crafting compelling messages, and addressing political opposition with evidence-based arguments. By avoiding these common mistakes, you can increase your chances of making a real difference in the lives of veterans. Remember that advocating for yourself can include understanding VA benefits updates.

It’s also important to note that advocating for policy changes can sometimes feel like you’re spotting fake news. Staying informed and critical about the information you consume is essential for effective advocacy. Also, consider how tech can assist veterans mental health, as this is a key area for policy changes.

The fight for veterans’ rights is a marathon, not a sprint. By focusing on policy changes and avoiding these common pitfalls, we can create a more just and equitable society for those who have served our country. Now, go out there and make some noise.