Webb-Hagel GI Bill to overhaul veterans' education benefits while McCain and Pentagon object!

By: buzzbolt
Published On: 5/9/2008 7:29:50 PM

Senator Jim Webb (D-Va.) supported by Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) introduced a bill last year which would substantially increase educational benefits to veterans. The Webb-Hagel bill would pay a realistic amount in line with World War II veterans' benefits. The original GI Bill provided full tuition, housing, and living expenses for over 8 million veterans. By the mid 1980s, the plan was scaled down so that today a veteran can receive a flat sum of approximately $10,000 a year for four years and must personally invest into the system some active duty pay.

Senator John McCain offered vague objections to Webb-Hagel and withheld his support.  Then, with some haste and under pressure from veterans' groups, he introduced his own bill to counter Webb-Hagel.  

Differences involve length of service for eligibility.   Webb-Hagel starts benefits after two years of enlistment.  McCain,  backed by the White House and Pentagon, would insist on 6 to 12 years of enlistment.

McCain and Pentagon officials believe that Webb-Hagel would hurt the services by enticing service members to reject reenlistment in favor of college and civilian life.

Today, the Congressional Budget Office, a non-partisan service of Congress,  reported that Webb-Hagel offers more hard benefits to the military than expected. The CBO concluded that departures from the service would be more than offset by recruitment gains.

Complicated issues exist on both sides; however, the current GI Bill is an outdated failure that needs the kind of overhaul first proposed by Jim Webb in 2006. Strange that John McCain, a war hero veteran, and Congress member since 1983, waited until 2008 and five years into the Iraq war to make his proposal.

Link to CBO report:  http://abcnews.go.com/images/P...  

Comments



Only Republicans (relawson - 5/9/2008 11:41:40 PM)
Could send our boys off to war and tell them to eat cake when they get back and enroll in college.

Unfortunately there are some blue-dog Democrats that need to stop siding with the Republicans here.  If their only concern is paying for this, I'm sure they can find some wasteful spending to cut.  Over 1 billion $$$ a week in Iraq might be a good start.  



Hypocrisy (The Grey Havens - 5/10/2008 1:19:52 AM)
is a core republican value.


So much for the concept of the citizen-soldier (Quizzical - 5/10/2008 8:11:57 AM)
6 to 12 years of enlistment to qualify for the new GI bill?  Essentially they are saying that it is a benefit only for the career military.  


DoD Objections (South County - 5/10/2008 8:20:55 AM)
Secretary Gates noted his concerns with the bill on Thursday at a press conference at the Pentagon.  He's concerned about the 3-year eligibility rule, and would like to see it increased to 6 years (after the first enlistment).


Most enlistments aren't for 6 years (relawson - 5/10/2008 9:23:44 AM)
Unless you get an advanced job that requires a longer enlistment, most enlistments are 3-5 years.

So increasing to 6 years is a great way to force most people to fall through the cracks.  Or, compel them to serve longer and make them even older when they finally complete their college degree.

Dr. Evil would approve of Gates.



6 yr. rule (South County - 5/10/2008 5:44:30 PM)
It would basically eliminate folks who only serve one enlistment and do not reenlist.  If you serve 3-5 years then reenlist you'd satisfy the 6 yr. rule.  Officers are assumed to be career employees unless they resign their commission early, so 6-years in they'd be O-3's (Captains or Navy LT's).  

Gates has been a good leader and done a solid job as SECDEF.  He brings some adult supervision to the picture that was long overdue.



Gates is just being a good soldier and following the Adminstration (Catzmaw - 5/12/2008 11:43:46 AM)
line.  I don't think his heart's in this fight.  A few weeks ago when he was testifying before the Armed Services Committee and Webb asked him about the opposition to S-22 he: a) seemed surprised that there WAS opposition to it; and b) spoke in a very complimentary way of the benefits of the GI Bill, noting that he attended school on the Bill after his own service in the AF in the 50s.  Overall I don't think he's done a bad job, he's a definite and substantial improvement over Rumsfeld, and he probably figures this thing's going to go through whatever stand he takes on it.  Gates is political enough to know when to pick his fights with the Administration.


American Legion Commander supports Webb-Hagel GI Bill (buzzbolt - 5/12/2008 12:52:20 PM)
INDIANAPOLIS, May 9  PRNewswire-USNewswire -- The leader of the nation's preeminent veterans organization criticized Congress for delaying a needed GI Bill because of cost.

"When The American Legion championed the original Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, even some veterans groups complained that it would 'break the treasury,'" National Commander Marty Conatser said. "Instead, the GI Bill transformed the economy and has been widely hailed as the greatest domestic legislation Congress ever passed. The critics were wrong then and they are wrong now."

See more here.