The Pentagon's Unfounded Fears About The GI Bill
In February, Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), along with a bipartisan Senate
coalition that included Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Frank Lautenberg
(D-NJ), and John Warner (R-VA), re-introduced the "21st
Century GI Bill," which aims to
dramatically expand educational
benefits for returning veterans. The original GI Bill, which
President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed in 1944, "provided full tuition,
housing, and living costs for some 8 million veterans," but it has been
scaled back over time to such an extent that "today
the most a veteran can receive is approximately $9,600 a year for four
years -- no matter what college
costs." Webb's bill, which has 57
co-sponsors, would pay
a significant portion of college costs for all service
members, including national
guard members, who served in active
duty
after Sept. 11, 2001. Even though support for increased educational
benefits for veterans should be "at
the top of the list of
no-brainers in Washington," the Pentagon,
the White House, and some members of Congress are resisting Webb's
efforts "out
of fear that too many will use
it." In a press briefing earlier
this month, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell warned of the "harm"
Webb's bill would do to troop retention and objected to
the generous benefits given after "only" two years of service.
Accepting the Pentagon's argument, Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and
Richard Burr (R-NC) have introduced
their own GI bill expansion that pegs benefits to the length of time
served in active duty, reserving the most
generous benefits to older
soldiers who signed up before 9/11. But
major veterans organizations such as VoteVets.org,
Iraq
and Afghanistan Veterans of America,
and the American
Legion back Webb's bill.
RETENTION
VERSUS RECRUITMENT: "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," said Morrell when arguing
against Webb's bill. Defense Secretary Robert
Gates has aired similar concerns, saying that his "first
objective is to strengthen the All-Volunteer Force"
and that
"serious retention issues could arise" under a too-generous GI Bill.
But these concerns are overblown since they do not account for
increased recruitment. While increased education benefits are expected
to affect reenlistment rates, a recent Congressional Budget Office
(CBO)
report found that the loss in retention from Webb's bill will be entirely
made
up for by increased military
recruits. By CBO's accounting, the
expected 16 percent drop in the reenlistment rate would be offset by "a
16 percent increase in recruits." As Sen. John Warner (R-VA) has noted,
"[P]utting a big piece of cheese out there will
induce more qualified people to
join just to get this. It should be
a tremendous incentive for recruitment."
TWO
YEARS VERSUS SIX: While
claiming that the Pentagon has no issue with "more generous education
benefits to troops," Morrell said that the Pentagon is "certainly
concerned" that the benefits in Webb's bill "would
be eligible to them after only
two years of service." Instead,
the
Pentagon wants to peg increased benefits to "a longer period of
service," adding that "six years would show a commitment to service."
Under Morrell's terms, a
soldier who participated in the invasion
of Baghdad
in April 2003 and had remained in service ever since, would be
forced to wait until April 2009 before becoming eligible for full
benefits.
But as VoteVets Chairman and Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz points out,
"time of service isn't
a measure of commitment to service." "What about the troops who served
under six years, did a few tours in
Iraq, and came back without a limb, and could no longer serve? Have
they shown less of a commitment to America?"
asks Soltz.
Additionally, Soltz notes that soldiers sign up for eight year
contracts, with most for four years active. "So even if they do begin
school when they're done with their active
duty commitment, the military can call them up at any time they need
them, for the life of the troop's contract."
COSTS
VERSUS BENEFITS: In testimony
to Congress last summer, some Defense Department officials offered
up the cost of Webb's bill as one reason to resist it, saying that "the
current
program for active duty is
basically sound and serves its purpose in support of the all-volunteer
force. The department finds no need for the kind of sweeping (and
expensive) changes offered." But the expansion of educational benefits
in Webb's bill is "is projected to
cost about $2.5
billion per year," roughly
the cost of U.S. operations in
Iraq
for one week. In announcing the American Legion's support for Webb's
bill last week, National Commander
Marty Conatser 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."
Additionally, as New York Times columnist
Bob
Herbert pointed out recently, "[M]oney 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." In
fact, educational benefits for veterans are a proven investment. A 1988
congressional study found "that every dollar spent
on educational benefits under the original GI Bill added
seven dollars
to
the national economy in terms of productivity,
consumer spending
and
tax
revenue."
|
|
|
|
The research team that brings you The Progress Report and ThinkProgress.org needs summer interns! Click here for more information.
"The Nissan Motor Company plans to sell an electric car in the United States and Japan by 2010," the first by a major automaker to "bring a zero-emission vehicle to the American market."
CALIFORNIA: "Raids by federal authorities on undocumented immigrants in Northern California panic parents and school officials as fears spread that students might be targeted."
LOUISIANA: Proposal to phase out Louisiana's income tax would "leave a huge gap" in the state budget.
MASSACHUSETTS: "State environmental regulators are asking federal officials to ban boats from discharging waste in Boston Harbor and Cape Cod Bay," an attempt to "make the state's entire coastline off-limits to sewage."
THINK
PROGRESS: Conservatives lash out
at Bush administration guidelines
on terrorism language: It's "McCarthyism in reverse."
ATTACKERMAN:
Americans shouldn't try to dictate "what the Iraq war means to an
Iraqi."
TPM
MUCKRAKER: Pentagon document
dump: E-mailer suggested "softball"
interview with top general.
MEDIA
MATTERS:
Military analysts involved in Pentagon propaganda program were quoted
more than 4,500 times on major TV networks and NPR.
Topic Cloud
