1
   

Washington Must Act: IAVA's new G.I. Bill

 
 
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2008 10:20 am
Washington Must Act: IAVA's 2008 Legislative Agenda
by Paul Rieckhoff
Posted February 8, 2008

After six years of war, it is our country's moral obligation to provide real support for our troops and veterans. Our military is being tested like never before, while our veterans lack timely and sufficient health care and benefits. This generation of warriors is also facing new and unique problems, from Traumatic Brain Injury and alarming rates of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder to inadequate educational benefits and multiple, extended deployments. To meet this need, IAVA has released our annual Legislative Agenda. Our 2008 Legislative Agenda covers the entire warfighting cycle - before, during and after deployment - offering sound policy solutions to the most urgent problems facing America's newest generation of veterans and their families.

The cornerstone of our 2008 Legislation Agenda is a new GI Bill. After World War II, nearly eight million servicemembers took advantage of GI Bill education benefits. A veteran of WWII was entitled to free tuition, books and a living stipend that completely covered the cost of education. Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, however, receive only a fraction of the support offered to the Greatest Generation. For many, the burden of student loans and mounting debt can simply become too great.

Today we have the opportunity to renew our social contract with our servicemen and women, and help rebuild our military. IAVA supports reinstating a World War II-style GI Bill that will cover the true cost of education and will fairly reward all combat veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Critics have said the GI Bill is too expensive. The fact is a new GI Bill would be a bargain. The current GI Bill cost the Veterans' Affairs Department $1.6 billion in 2004. Even if a World War II-style GI Bill were to double that cost, it would be about what we spend in a week in the War on Terror. And the GI Bill is more than a veterans' benefit. It is also an effective tool to stimulate the economy and to improve military readiness. Above all, a World War II -style GI Bill would thank this generation of combat veterans for their service and their sacrifice.

Everyone from Hillary Clinton to Mitt Romney has said the current GI Bill is outdated. It's critical that we pass a new GI Bill that actually pays for the cost of college. Today's troops deserve the same educational benefits World War II veterans received. We need less talk and more action from lawmakers on this vital issue, and we look forward to meeting with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to get a new GI Bill passed this year.

For the next few weeks, IAVA will be bringing this message to Washington. Starting the week of February 11th, IAVA veterans from across the country will storm Capitol Hill to urge Senators and Representatives to support key legislation for veterans. We hope you will join us.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 245 • Replies: 3
No top replies

 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2008 10:29 am
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2008 10:44 am
No Funds in Bush Budget For Troop-Benefits Plan
The LIAR Bush is at it again. He has a habit of proposing legislation to benefit those the public wants to support---but then he doesn't fund the program. Reminds me of the male line of "if you have sex with me I will still respect you in the morning." Trouble is Bush doesn't respect us in the morning or any time. ---BBB

No Funds in Bush Budget For Troop-Benefits Plan
He Made Proposal in January Speech
By Michael Abramowitz and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, February 9, 2008; A01

President Bush drew great applause during his State of the Union address last month when he called on Congress to allow U.S. troops to transfer their unused education benefits to family members. "Our military families serve our nation, they inspire our nation, and tonight our nation honors them," he said.

A week later, however, when Bush submitted his $3.1 trillion federal budget to Congress, he included no funding for such an initiative, which government analysts calculate could cost $1 billion to $2 billion annually.

Bush's proposal was added to the speech late in the process, administration officials said, after the president decided that he wanted to announce a program that would favor military families. That left little time to vet the idea, develop formal cost estimates or gauge how many people might take advantage of such a program. Some administration officials said the proposal surprised them, and they voiced concerns about how to fund it.

Some critics in Congress cite the episode as a case study of what they consider the slapdash way Bush has put together the legislative program for his final year in office. Still, the idea is generating bipartisan interest from members of Congress who are eager to assist military families coping with long-term absences of loved ones deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have drawn up legislation that would remove restrictions that currently prevent most troops from transferring education benefits to family members.

"It has some merit to it. I don't have any idea what it costs -- that's been one of the problems in the past," said Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.), chairman of the House Budget Committee. "That's not the only inconsistency or contradiction in his budget by any means. The budget overstates revenues and understates expenditures in a big way."

A senior White House official said the proposal was suggested to the president by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who got the idea from a military spouse who told him that the Army has a limited program to transfer education benefits. The spouse told Gates, " 'Army spouses get this benefit, other branches should, too.' He brought it to the president and said, 'I think this is a valid point,' " the official said.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Bush liked Gates's suggestion, which eventually became one sentence in the president's 53-minute State of the Union speech. "It is a good idea, and we are trying to determine the cost and put together a proposal," the official said.

Under the current GI Bill, service members are eligible for nearly $40,000 in education benefits, such as college tuition or employment training, after they complete three years of active duty. Nearly 70 percent of active-duty U.S. troops and veterans use at least part of these benefits, which cover three-quarters of the cost of tuition, room, board and fees in a four-year state university, according to Lt. Col. Jonathan Withington, a Pentagon spokesman. U.S. officials concede that the cost would probably soar, with most families making full use of the benefits.

The GI Bill education benefits cost nearly $2 billion in fiscal 2006. Pentagon officials said they are unable to provide a figure for the potential cost of the new proposal, or for other initiatives for military families that Bush proposed in his State of the Union speech.

The president also called for expanded access to child -- care for military families and for new preferences for military spouses competing for positions in the federal government. Pentagon officials are working on those proposals as well. They said Bush envisions expanding child care for at least 58,000 military children ages 1 to 12 year-round. The Pentagon already provides care facilities for about 200,000 children.

A third component of the Bush initiative involves opening up more government employment opportunities for military spouses and providing money for training or professional certification so they can more easily find jobs when they move from state to state. A pilot program now provides up to $6,000 over two years to help spouses create such "portable" careers.

The Pentagon is still working out the potential costs, but it reports that about 77 percent of the 675,000 spouses of active-duty troops say they want or need to work and that they might take advantage of such a program.

The Army has a limited program that allows soldiers to transfer some of their education benefits to spouses or children, but it has several restrictions. For instance, only soldiers reenlisting in certain critical skill areas are eligible, and they are allowed to transfer only about half their benefits.

Retired Col. Robert Norton, deputy director for government relations at the Military Officers Association of America, said military families have been "clamoring" for an expansion of the GI Bill in recent years as a critical incentive for troops to stay in the service. He noted that the families endure much hardship and stress while following their spouses around the world or being separated for great lengths of time.

Most U.S. troops who use the GI program use only about half the education benefits, Norton said, and only a tiny percentage use all of their money, so the cost of allowing family members to participate in the program would probably be high. "There is likely to be a pretty hefty price tag," Norton said. "We think it's a good thing for military families. We would like to see the details."

The idea of allowing more troops to extend education benefits to family members has been percolating on Capitol Hill for some time. Rep. Roscoe G. Bartlett (R-Md.) has been pushing it for years and introduced a bill after Bush's surprise endorsement. His measure would drop the restrictions on how many benefits can be transferred and would allow members of the reserves and National Guard to participate.

In the Senate, Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) has introduced similar legislation. In an interview, she said that she hopes the White House will back her plan. "We ought to be able to get it pretty quickly through," she said. "It was their idea, and they ought to get credit for it."

The idea has bipartisan support. "It was a very pleasant surprise coming from an administration that has tried to balance its budgets on the backs of military families," said Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), who is co-sponsoring Bartlett's bill. "I don't know where they got the idea, but I am not going to quibble."
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2008 11:04 am
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Washington Must Act: IAVA's new G.I. Bill
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.47 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 04:27:37