Pentagon biggest obstacle to Democrats' GI bill

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Veterans groups say it's time to expand college aid for GIs, and Democrats want to use an election year to do it. Their biggest obstacle? The Pentagon.

The Defense Department is lobbying against legislation proposed by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., that would guarantee a full-ride scholarship for service members to any in-state public university..

[Guess Who]

I think they more than deserve it. I thought that was part of the program anyway....

[Mykro]

No, the Sunshine Patriot Republicans say they support the military, but they don't. They'll use you up then discard you. When you come home, if you are not disabled, they'll send you right back. If you're wounded, they'll make sure the care you get is the cheapest they can find. How come most of the legislation that is proposed to help vets is from the so called despised Liberal Dems?

[Congress to cushy]

I get so sick of Congress talking about our Veterans. They should not have to BEG for anything! That is why the people who join our Military are extra ordinary people. There has been NO DRAFT, these people JOINED!!! Bill Clinton degraded our Military when he was in office. If I could I would take EVERY paycheck away from Congress and GIVE it to OUR MILITARY! They work for it. Then I want to see who really wants to serve the American people! The Kennedy's and oh there are plenty of other names, have ripped the American people off! People need to Turn OFF the T.V. and quit going to the movies to show Hollywood what we think. I have already started. The ones who are in Country Music show the Military how they feel, by going over to see them. Every time I see someone in uniform I let them know they are my HERO! I know someone else besides me cares about AMERICA!

[Rick of Lake Havasu City]

Posturing-----Democrats want to use an election year.

Replace them all

[workerbeedrone]

If you can get a full ride for playing football, you should be able to get a full ride for doing 3 combat tours in the Middle East.

[wyojake]

Troops wouldn't re-up if they had a better life options.

[winzy]

This smacks of politics more then anything else. Another article from a few days back is below. I'd like to know the bill number and read the debate on it and other comments.

These political games contribute greatly to our governments failures. We'd be better off if there were no political parties and our vote chose an individual and not a party.

Another AP article says this:

"Republicans are up in arms that they have been excluded from opportunities to participate in the crafting of the war funding bill, and in response they have forced dozens of procedural votes over the past three days in protest.

"They bypassed the (Appropriations) committee. They refused to allow us to have any amendments," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "And so the voices of half the American people are not allowed to be heard on the House floor."

At the same time, Pelosi worked to overcome rebellion by some of her own members. Moderate to conservative Democrats are upset that the war funding bill is carrying new benefit programs - especially the boost in GI education benefits - without paying for them with offsetting cuts to other programs."

then this:

"Meanwhile, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., and fellow Democrats on the panel revealed a far more ambitious list of domestic add-ons to the war funding measure.

The additional money in the $205 billion Senate bill includes $8.7 billion for continuing recovery efforts from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. There's also $490 million in crime-fighting grants to state and local governments,$451 million to repair roads and bridges damaged by natural disasters,$450 million to combat western wildfires and $400 million for rural counties suffering from cutbacks in timber-related revenues."

[winzy]

Some Democrats want to pass it without going by the pay as you go rule.

Senate Democrats reject taxing rich to boost GI Bill

http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/nationa...

"The half-percentage point surcharge on income exceeding $500,000 for individuals and income above $1 million for couples was added to the House war funding bill on Tuesday. The tax increase would be used to finance a $52 billion increase in college aid for post-Sept. 11, 2001, veterans that has been added to the war funding measure.

The tax increase on wealthier people was inserted to mollify moderate House Democrats upset with Democratic leaders' original plan to simply add the big increase in benefits under the GI Bill to the near-record budget deficit. That would violate so-called pay-as-you-go budget rules that require new benefit programs to be "paid for" with accompanying revenue increases or spending cuts."

[Lance Winslow]

winzy wrote:

This smacks of politics more then anything else. Another article from a few days back is below. I'd like to know the bill number and read the debate on it and other comments.
These political games contribute greatly to our governments failures. We'd be better off if there were no political parties and our vote chose an individual and not a party.
Another AP article says this:
"Republicans are up in arms that they have been excluded from opportunities to participate in the crafting of the war funding bill, and in response they have forced dozens of procedural votes over the past three days in protest.
"They bypassed the (Appropriations) committee. They refused to allow us to have any amendments," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "And so the voices of half the American people are not allowed to be heard on the House floor."
At the same time, Pelosi worked to overcome rebellion by some of her own members. Moderate to conservative Democrats are upset that the war funding bill is carrying new benefit programs - especially the boost in GI education benefits - without paying for them with offsetting cuts to other programs."
then this:
"Meanwhile, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., and fellow Democrats on the panel revealed a far more ambitious list of domestic add-ons to the war funding measure.
The additional money in the $205 billion Senate bill includes $8.7 billion for continuing recovery efforts from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. There's also $490 million in crime-fighting grants to state and local governments,$451 million to repair roads and bridges damaged by natural disasters,$450 million to combat western wildfires and $400 million for rural counties suffering from cutbacks in timber-related revenues."

Yes, it is a political issue: Democrats want better medical, psychological and social benefits for our troops while Republicans oppose increased spending.

[winzy]

That was the conservative and moderate Democrats opposing it without the funding attached.

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>Yes, it is a political issue: Democrats want better medical, psychological and social benefits for our troops while Republicans oppose increased spending.

[Lance Winslow]

winzy wrote:

That was the conservative and moderate Democrats opposing it without the funding attached.
<quoted text>

Funding is an obligitory part of the bill under "pay as you go" rules for new federal programs.

[winzy]

Yes, the moderate and conservative Democrats were upset because the funding wasn't there. They did not follow the pay as you go rules. I'm not sure if it ever got resolved, but I do see their point. Outside of that the CBO estimates on it do not paint a bright picture.

Not that GI's do not deserve it, but that Congress also has an obligation to think enough ahead to resolve issues with funding, effect on military recruitment, unintended consequences when the write a bill.

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>Funding is an obligitory part of the bill under "pay as you go" rules for new federal programs.

[wyojake]

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>Funding is an obligitory part of the bill under "pay as you go" rules for new federal programs.

extension and modification of an old federal program. Every penny for Iraq and all pork contained therein wasn't pay as you go. Wonder if they voted yes on that? If they did they should be thrown out on their ass for their present attitude or held to account.

[winzy]

That is what I was trying to point out.

While the bill is good, Congress has an obligation to be responsible with their spending too. If they are ignoring pay as you go, because of politics and wanting to hurt Republicans, it is irresponsible.

The moderate and conservative Democrats offered a way to pay it, it was refused by the other Democrats.

That sounds like politics, they would rather ignore pay as you go, and pass the law, so they can yell about Republicans.

They should also consider the effect it has on the military as far as costs and retention. Its in the CBO report, so they are forewarned of the issues it can/will cause.

wyojake wrote:

<quoted text>
extension and modification of an old federal program. Every penny for Iraq and all pork contained therein wasn't pay as you go. Wonder if they voted yes on that? If they did they should be thrown out on their ass for their present attitude or held to account.

[Lance Winslow]

Education is obviously not in the interest of the Pentagon.

[wyojake]

Lance Winslow wrote:

Education is obviously not in the interest of the Pentagon.

kinda hard to fight a war when people are wondering if the orders are legal all the time :-)

Maybe it's time for term limits on Generals :-)

[AntiFlag]

Guess Who wrote:

I think they more than deserve it. I thought that was part of the program anyway....

A commonly believed myth. There has been no GI bill since 1975.

[AntiFlag]

Rick of Lake Havasu City wrote:

Posturing-----Democrats want to use an election year.
Replace them all

Yeah, like Bush sending out vote-buying money and call it tax-rebate checks.

Wait and see if he doesn't start declaring terror alerts when the election gets near.

[AntiFlag]

Joining the military is a really STUPID idea. If guys would "just say no" there'd be nobody to fight these bogus wars.

[Mykro]

The Pentagon doesn't want troops educated enough to figure out they're getting screwed when their enlistments are up. Or when they get sent to Walter Reid.