Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Webb GI Bill Would Encourage Young People to Join the Military

Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress at 10:03 AM on May 12, 2008.


The American Legion comes out in support of the Webb GI Bill.
bandofbrothers

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

The Bush administration has come out strongly against Sen. Jim Webb's (D-VA) efforts to dramatically expand educational benefits for returning veterans. In a press briefing on May 6, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell warned of the "harm" Webb’s 21st Century GI Bill would do to troop retention and objected to the generous benefits given after "only" two years of service:

But we are certainly concerned that this would be eligible to them after only two years of service. We think pegging it to a longer period of service -- the number we have in mind, at this point, is six years of service -- that the longer you stay in, the sweeter the benefits are to you. ... The last thing we want to do is provide a benefit -- or the last thing we want to do is create a situation in which we are losing our men and women who we have worked so hard to train.

On Friday, the American Legion released a statement criticizing the Bush administration's position and endorsing Webb's bill:

"This bill would encourage young men and women to join the military," [National Commander Marty] Conatser said. "As far as retention goes, the CBO estimates that a simple $8,000 bonus to personnel at their first enlistment point would increase reenlistments by 2 percentage points. Another way to encourage mid-level servicemembers to stay in the military is to transfer GI Bill benefits to family members so the servicemember can remain in the military and still benefit from the program."

As Conatser points out, any declines in reenlistment would be made up for by increases in recruitment. The recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) assessment found that Webb’s bill, which would "more than double the present value of educational benefits for servicemembers at the first reenlistment point," would result in a 16 percent decline in the reenlistment rate. However, it would also "result in a 16 percent increase in recruits."

Conatser also addressed criticisms that the GI Bill is too expensive, pointing out that the "bulk of that cost is paid for by the men and women who wear the uniform. Benefits are just a small, small cost of war."


Fox, CNN, CBS Reaction Groups: Obama Won
Who won the debate? It's looking like a clean sweep for Obama.
Post by Sam Stein. October 7, 2008.
Obama Coolly Dispatches Punch-Drunk McCain
Tonight's winner is clear.
Post by Ian Welsh. October 7, 2008.
DEBATE ANALYSIS: A Minute by Minute Look at McCain vs. Obama
Here's what happened at tonight's debate.
Post by Staff. October 7, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Bush Paradox
Posted by: Gaubladt on May 12, 2008 10:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Allowing education benefits after 2 years is bad for the military? But,creating a shadow army, Black Water, and allowing a massive drain of military personel and funds to that organization is not harmful to the military?
The argument doesn't hold water. There is another reason for trashing the Webb Bill.
The real reason: The Republicans can't let the Democrats to anything beneficial for their constituents. It's all about obstruction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Fewer Who Enlist, for now the better..
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on May 12, 2008 10:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right now the fewer young people who join the military for any reason, the less likely we are to continue these capricious wasteful ruinous Wars..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

STOP THE WAR - DON'T ENLIST!
Posted by: truthteller on May 12, 2008 10:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree, and have been advocating an active boycott of enlistment - including protests wherever military recruiters show up - to shut down our war machine once and for all.

The military is already on the ropes, they are having to take formerly undesirable recruits (the uneducated and former felons) in record numbers to even approach their monthly quotas. We need to keep up the pressure between now and November to make it impossible for the administration to increase troop levels anywhere. We need to get the U. S. out of the business of being enforcers for corporatism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In general, we don't need more chiefs...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on May 12, 2008 11:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...we need more indians to accomplish the missions that people of the United States, via Congress and the U.S. President, set before the military.

I don't agree that nation-building is a valid military mission, but Webb's bill would seem to promote recruitment over retention. That would probably, on average, be a good thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nation Building
Posted by: mnascimento on May 13, 2008 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 1969, I attended college on the G.I. Bill. Minimum requirement as I remember was 180 days of honorable service. I served three years.
For myself, and hundreds of thousands of others, it was the only path to an education. You didn't have to be an exceptional scholar or athlete competing for limited scholarships, or the child of a privileged family.
At that time, my home state offered free tuition at public institutions, and the G.I. bill paid a monthly sum for up to 48 months, for honorably discharged Vets.
I find it stunning that the Government is willing to pay more than the annual cost of an education, to incarcerate so many young people.
A great many of those standing around on street corners, getting into trouble, because living wage jobs simply are not available, would jump at the chance to trade military service for a future. I did.
I also am appalled that so many young people borrow their way into years of high interest student loans to attend college. It appears that many are excluding majors that wont lead to highly paid employment because they may not be able to repay their loans and enjoy a reasonable standard of living. That may mean fewer teachers etc. down the road.
Opposition to the bill is so short sighted it makes me weep with frustration. It could serve so many needs in terms of our own nation building.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nation Building Posted by: Timba
Nation Building
Posted by: mnascimento on May 13, 2008 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 1969, I attended college on the G.I. Bill. Minimum requirement as I remember was 180 days of honorable service. I served three years.
For myself, and hundreds of thousands of others, it was the only path to an education. You didn't have to be an exceptional scholar or athlete competing for limited scholarships, or the child of a privileged family.
At that time, my home state offered free tuition at public institutions, and the G.I. bill paid a monthly sum for up to 48 months, for honorably discharged Vets.
I find it stunning that the Government is willing to pay more than the annual cost of an education, to incarcerate so many young people.
A great many of those standing around on street corners, getting into trouble, because living wage jobs simply are not available, would jump at the chance to trade military service for a future. I did.
I also am appalled that so many young people borrow their way into years of high interest student loans to attend college. It appears that many are excluding majors that wont lead to highly paid employment because they may not be able to repay their loans and enjoy a reasonable standard of living. That may mean fewer teachers etc. down the road.
Opposition to the bill is so short sighted it makes me weep with frustration. It could serve so many needs in terms of our own nation building.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Say What!!!!!!
Posted by: TruthBeTold on May 16, 2008 7:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The American Legion, whose members will stampede over their new born grandchildren to get a photo-op with draft dodger Cheney and hider-out-in- chief Bush, are NOW supporting something that would benefit the soldiers?

This story must be a joke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]