If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by on May 6, 2008, 6:10 pm
New York Times
Opinion
Op-Ed Columnist
Doing the Troops Wrong
By BOB HERBERT
Published: May 6, 2008
At the top of the list of no-brainers in Washington should be Senator
Jim Webb’s proposed expansion of education benefits for the men and
women who have served in the armed forces since Sept. 11, 2001.
It’s awfully hard to make the case that these young people who have
sacrificed so much don’t deserve a shot at a better future once their
wartime service has ended.
Senator Webb, a Virginia Democrat, has been the guiding force behind
this legislation, which has been dubbed the new G.I. bill. The measure
is decidedly bipartisan. Mr. Webb’s principal co-sponsors include
Republican Senators Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and John Warner of
Virginia, and Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey.
(All four senators are veterans of wartime service — Senators Webb and
Hagel in Vietnam, Warner in World War II and Korea and Lautenberg in
World War II.)
Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton
are on board, as are Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, and Nancy
Pelosi, the speaker of the House.
Who wouldn’t support an effort to pay for college for G.I.’s who have
willingly suited up and put their lives on the line, who in many cases
have served multiple tours in combat zones and in some cases have been
wounded?
We did it for those who served in World War II. Why not now?
Well, you might be surprised at who is not supporting this effort. The
Bush administration opposes it,
and so does*** Senator John McCain.***
Reinvigorating the G.I. bill is one of the best things this nation
could do. The original G.I. Bill of Rights, signed into law by
President Franklin Roosevelt in 1944, paid the full load of a
returning veteran’s education at a college or technical school and
provided a monthly stipend. It was an investment that paid astounding
dividends. Millions of veterans benefited, and they helped transform
the nation. College would no longer be the exclusive preserve of the
wealthy and those who crowned themselves the intellectual elite.
As The New York Times wrote on the 50th anniversary of the G.I. bill:
“Few laws have done so much for so many.”
“These veterans were able to get a first-class future,” Senator Webb
told me in an interview. “But not only that. For every dollar that was
spent on the World War II G.I. bill, seven dollars came back in the
form of tax remunerations from those who received benefits.”
Senator Lautenberg went to Columbia on the G.I. bill, and Senator
Warner to Washington and Lee University and then to law school.
The benefits have not kept pace over the decades with the real costs
of attending college. Moreover, service members have to make an
out-of-pocket contribution — something over $100 a month during their
first year of service — to qualify for the watered-down benefits.
This is not exactly first-class treatment of the nation’s warriors.
The Bush administration opposes the new G.I. bill primarily on the
grounds that it is too generous, would be difficult to administer and
would adversely affect retention.
This is bogus. The estimated $2.5 billion to $4 billion annual cost of
the Webb proposal is dwarfed by the hundreds of billions being spent
on the wars we’re asking service members to fight in Iraq and
Afghanistan. What’s important to keep in mind is that the money that
goes to bolstering the education of returning veterans is an
investment, in both the lives of the veterans themselves and the
future of the nation.
The notion that expanding educational benefits will have a negative
effect on retention seems silly. The Webb bill would cover tuition at
a rate comparable to the highest tuition at a state school in the
state in which the veteran would be enrolled. That kind of solid
benefit would draw talented individuals into the military in large
numbers.
Senator Webb, a former secretary of the Navy who specialized in
manpower issues, said he has seen no evidence that G.I.’s would opt
out of the service in significantly higher numbers because of such
benefits.
***Senator McCain’s office said on Monday that it was following the
Pentagon’s lead on this matter, getting guidance from Defense
Secretary Robert Gates. Under pressure because of his unwillingness to
support Senator Webb’s effort, Senator McCain introduced legislation
with substantially fewer co-sponsors last week that expands some
educational benefits for G.I.’s, but far less robustly than Senator
Webb’s bill.***
“It’s not even close to the Webb bill,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive
director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, an advocacy
group.
Politicians tend to talk very, very big about supporting our men and
women in uniform. But time and again — whether it’s about providing
armor for their safety or an education for their future — we find that
talk to be very, very cheap.
|
|
Posted by HeyBub on May 6, 2008, 8:42 pm
aspasia wrote:
> New York Times
> Opinion
>
>
> Op-Ed Columnist
> Doing the Troops Wrong
>
> By BOB HERBERT
> Published: May 6, 2008
>
> At the top of the list of no-brainers in Washington should be Senator
> Jim Webb's proposed expansion of education benefits for the men and
> women who have served in the armed forces since Sept. 11, 2001.
Once again, you post an entire article. This time, however, you do have
valid attribution.
It's interesting to note, in passing, that the last time the New York Times
endorsed a Republican for president was Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952.
Nevertheless, there's not much need for a G.I. Bill. Military people get a
college education while IN the military. General Petraeus, for example, got
both his masters and PhD while on active duty. If you count his B.S. from
the U.S. Military Academy, he got all his college while in the military.
|
|
Posted by Dave Bugg on May 6, 2008, 8:53 pm
HeyBub wrote:
> aspasia wrote:
>> New York Times
>> Opinion
>>
>>
>> Op-Ed Columnist
>> Doing the Troops Wrong
>>
>> By BOB HERBERT
>> Published: May 6, 2008
>>
>> At the top of the list of no-brainers in Washington should be Senator
>> Jim Webb's proposed expansion of education benefits for the men and
>> women who have served in the armed forces since Sept. 11, 2001.
>
> Once again, you post an entire article. This time, however, you do
> have valid attribution.
>
> It's interesting to note, in passing, that the last time the New York
> Times endorsed a Republican for president was Dwight D. Eisenhower in
> 1952.
> Nevertheless, there's not much need for a G.I. Bill. Military people
> get a college education while IN the military. General Petraeus, for
> example, got both his masters and PhD while on active duty. If you
> count his B.S. from the U.S. Military Academy, he got all his college
> while in the military.
And we must not overlook the fact that each member of the military is
trained within a specific MOS (military Occupation Specialty). This not only
provides a vocational training that is translatable, in many cases, to
civilian life, but also provides apprenticeship training. It all looks good
on a resume. After all, what righteous thinking employer wouldn't want to
hire someone who can drop an artillery round within meters of a stated
target? Or keep aircraft maintained under combat conditions? Or drive heavy
vehicles whilst under fire? Or coordinate the supply chain to keep a troop
movement supplied?
--
Dave www.davebbq.com
What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan
|
|
Posted by Dan Espen on May 6, 2008, 9:28 pm
aspasia writes:
More off topic stuff.
Welcome to my kill file.
Why you get IDIOTS to respond is beyond me.
|
|
Posted by Dave Bugg on May 6, 2008, 9:41 pm
Dan Espen wrote:
> aspasia writes:
>
> More off topic stuff.
> Welcome to my kill file.
> Why you get IDIOTS to respond is beyond me.
Irony meter just pegged.
--
Dave www.davebbq.com
What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan
|
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Saving $ on the gas bill | December 1, 2005, 2:03 pm |
| electric bill | January 23, 2006, 2:07 am |
| Cut your phone bill | May 23, 2007, 8:01 am |
| Why is my gas bill so high? Ideas? | September 1, 2005, 8:39 am |
| Big jump in electric bill | November 5, 2005, 10:13 am |
| Save 30% On Your Cooling Bill???? | July 4, 2005, 1:37 pm |
| HIGH ELECTRIC BILL | January 28, 2006, 11:40 pm |
| electricians bill came in - seems too high | May 19, 2006, 10:48 am |
| BGE Maryland, and an old electric bill | June 6, 2006, 12:32 am |
| SAVE Up To 25% On Your "" ELECTRIC BILL "" | July 12, 2006, 10:25 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap