If You Give The Troops Money For College, They Just Might Go

[Gimpy]

If You Give The Troops Money For College, They Just Might Go


ABC's Z. Byron Wolf reports:

The stage is a major wrap-yourself-in-the-flag, support-the-troops type measure on the floor of the US Senate in the coming weeks and it could have repercussions in the 2008 presidential campaign.


Most Democrats and some Republicans want to drastically improve college benefits for veterans through the GI Bill sponsored by Virginia Democrat Sen. Jim Webb.


Presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., solidified his position in a paper statement last night, along with the Pentagon and the White House, concerned that the measure could hurt retention in a time of war. In short, if you try to send the troops college, they might just go. (What a piss-poor arguement!.......Gimp)


It's a particularly interesting issue because it pits McCain against his strongest ally across the aisle, Connecticut Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, and high profile Republicans, like Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who is a co-sponsor of Webb's bill. It has also created a rallying point for veterans groups. Both Democratic presidential candidates are cosponsors of Webb's bill.


When senators consider the House version of the President's $108 billion war funding request in the coming weeks, look for Democrats to attach a proposal authored by Webb that would drastically upgrade the Montgomery GI Bill. Instead of receiving a fraction of college tuition (a max of about $3,000 per year), Webb and 54 other Senators from both parties want to make the GI Bill more like it was after WWII, when it paid for all of college, even private schools. They won't go quite that far, but would offer most veterans who serve in the war on terror -- even reserve and national guard who deploy -- compensation for the most expensive public school in their state as well as a living stipend.


McCain, along with Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., and Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., introduced his own, less generous plan that would encourage troops to stay in the military, increasing benefits more for troops who serve 12 years or more.


They point to a new report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, requested by Republicans on the Budget Committee that says improving college benefits for troops could lead affect military retention rates by as much as a 16 percent decrease.


Supporters of the Webb bill point to the same study, which says the improved college benefits would lead to a 16 percent increase in recruits overall. Plus, they argue the Webb bill would improve the quality of recruits who come to the military .

Beyond retention, however, Webb and others believe the country owes troops who sacrifice abroad, a good education when they return home.



###END###


Looks like McSame is following in the "footsteps" of his predecessor, G-Dumbya!---------BOHICA----if HE gets elected as the next CIC! We'll be SCREWED from ANOTHER Republican administration!...........:d:

[Gimpy]

For anyone wishing to read the full text of Senator Webbs bill, go here:


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.22:


Gimp

[Gimpy]

Here's the latest update on the battle for the "New GI Bill"............


###START###

Democrats Quash GOP Move to Adopt McCain’s GI Bill Alternative

By Kathleen Hunter, Bart Jansen and Josh Rogin, CQ Staff

Congressional Quarterly--May 14, 2008

Senate Democrats on Wednesday quashed a surprise Republican bid to advance a veterans’ benefit proposal co -authored by presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain .


By 55-42, the Senate tabled, and thus killed, an amendment offered by McCain ally Lindsey Graham , R-S.C., that would expand GI Bill educational benefits for veterans. Six Republicans joined Democrats in voting to table. McCain and his two Democratic presidential rivals were absent.


The Senate had stalled for hours earlier in the day after they surprised Majority Leader Harry Reid with the amendment and a follow-up move by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky., to force a cloture vote on it Friday.


Democrats objected, saying they had not seen a copy of the amendment, which mirrors a bill (S 2938) Graham introduced in competition to a major GI Bill expansion (S 22) proposed by Sen. Jim Webb , D-Va.


Graham offered his amendment to unrelated collective bargaining legislation (HR 980), saying that he did not anticipate another opportunity to amend a bill on the floor prior to the Memorial Day recess, which begins May 23.


“This is the last train leaving the station,” he said, adding that he would prefer to move a compromise proposal through regular order.

Graham introduced his proposal (S 2938) April 29 as an alternative to a major GI Bill expansion (S 22) proposed by Sen. Jim Webb , D-Va. His measure was cosponsored by 19 other Republicans, including McCain, and Independent Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, a McCain ally.


Graham said Wednesday that he had tried unsuccessfully to work with Webb to discuss ways to reconcile their competing benefit expansion proposals.


On Monday, Sen. Barack Obama , D-Ill., the leading Democratic presidential contender, admonished McCain for opposing the Webb bill, which is more generous to veterans, especially those who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Webb’s proposal is expected to be added to the supplemental emergency war funding bill that the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to mark up Thursday. A similar benefit expansion is included in the House version of the war supplemental, which is expected to come up for a floor vote Thursday.

Reid, D-Nev., was livid at the GOP move, accusing Republicans of resorting to an “untoward” parliamentary maneuver to give a boost to McCain’s White House bid.


“There’s a lot of things we can do to bring the presidential politics to what is going on here on the floor,” Reid said, adding that McCain was “ wrong on the war, wrong on the economy and wrong on this measure.”


Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who sponsored the bill with Kennedy, said Graham told him he might offer the amendment if he could not reach agreement with Webb.


Graham argued that his legislation would in many ways complement Webb’s bill.


Edward M. Kennedy , D-Mass., said he hoped the Senate would now proceed to pass the collective bargaining bill “without any more games.”


Republicans, including Gregg, complained that Democrats were refusing to give them a chance to amend Webb’s proposal.


Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin of Illinois said he would discuss options with Republicans but would not commit to allowing them a vote on Graham’s amendment as part of the supplemental debate.

Sudden Impasse


The Senate ground to a halt for several hours Wednesday. The underlying bill (HR 980) would extending collective bargaining rights to firefighters, police officers and other public safety employees nationwide.


Gregg said the spat over the GI Bill had not done any lasting harm to the bill, which he has supported, and insisted it was important to protest the Democratic hold on the amendment process.


Reid had said he had spoken May 9 with Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, the top Republican on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, in hopes of avoiding any need to block amendments on the floor by filling the amendment tree.


“I wanted to see if we could work on good faith for once without the Republicans playing petty politics,” Reid said. “Obviously we can’t do that.”


Key Differences


Webb told the Senate that despite the dust-up, he did not want the issue to be seen as partisan. He said that his bill has 56 cosponsors, including 10 Republicans.

The Webb and Graham bills take different approaches to updating the 1944 GI Bill of Rights (PL 78-346).


“There’s a philosophical difference in how the bills are structured,” said an aide to Webb.


One of the main departures is over how each bill deals with the ability of soldiers to transfer benefits to family members. The Graham bill removes restrictions on transferability limiting that option to specific military specialties and expands the option to National Guard and Reserve members.


The Webb bill is silent on the issue of transferability, although Democratic aides point out that the fiscal 2002 defense authorization act already gave the Pentagon the liberty to allow soldiers to transfer unused GI Bill benefits to family members.

In a March 20 letter to Sen. Daniel K. Akaka , D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, the Pentagon reported that only 296 out of 17,000 eligible soldiers took advantage of transferability in 2007 under an Army pilot program.

Secretary Gates wrote to leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee April 29 to argue for transferability and to oppose the Webb bill. Gates also said any benefits expansion should be directed towards career-oriented personnel who have served at least six years in the military.


“We’re trying to balance the benefit to the veterans also with maintaining an all- volunteer force and having as experienced a force as we can,” Gates said May 8.


Under the Webb bill, veterans would receive maximum educational benefits after 36 months of service and those benefits would be tied to the full cost of public school tuition and expenses in the veteran’s home state.

The Graham bill would require 12 years of service to garner a maximum benefit of $2000 per month, with increases in that figure tied to the consumer price index. Critics point out that the CPI has been steadily outpaced by tuition increases.


Several veterans groups expressed a preference for the Webb bill in a May 7 veterans committee hearing, and criticized the Graham bill because it may not cover full tuition costs.


“[The Graham bill] does not reflect the real costs of education, and would cover far less of the real costs with each passing year,” testified Eric Hilleman, Deputy Director for National Legislative Service at Veterans of Foreign Wars.


###END###

Gimp