By Nitya

May 26, 2008 3:17pm

McCain Defends Opposition to GI Bill

ABC News’ Bret Hovell reports: Presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain said that the United States must choose not to lose in Iraq and cast in starkly personal terms what he feels is his responsibility to keep America on a course toward victory.

"I have many responsibilities to the American people, and I take them all seriously. But I have one responsibility that outweighs all the others and that is to use whatever talents I possess and every resource God has granted me to protect the security of this great and good nation from all enemies foreign and domestic," McCain said in a Memorial Day remembrance speech in Albuquerque, NM.

He talked about the mistakes that had been made in Iraq pre-surge – which he mentions regularly on the stump – and said that those cannot deter America’s persistence in the war-torn region.

"We cannot react to those mistakes by embracing a course of action that will be an even greater mistake, a mistake of colossal historical proportions, which will — and I am sure of this — seriously endanger the security of the country I have served all my adult life," he said.

McCain, R-Ariz., addressed a largely veteran crowd of nearly 1,000 at the New Mexico Veterans Memorial, using the opportunity to talk about the prospects of victory in Iraq, as well as his views on a so-called "21st Century GI Bill."

McCain praised Virginia Democrat Sen. Jim Webb, the primary author of the bill that passed the Senate last week, as an "honorable man who takes his responsibility to veterans very seriously," but disagreed with Webb’s plan, which provides education benefits to members of the military after just one enlistment in the service.

McCain’s plan would offer more benefits to soldiers who have served longer terms.

"It is important to do that because, otherwise, we will encourage more people to leave the military after they have completed one enlistment," McCain said.

McCain’s plan would also provide benefits accrued by soldiers to be transferred to spouses and dependents.

McCain, the soon-to-be Republican nominee, seemed to argue that the potential for military attrition, due even to a well-meaning GI bill, was something he had to fight against.

"It would be easier, much easier, politically for me to have joined Senator Webb in offering his legislation," McCain said.

But speaking about the Iraq war in general, McCain later explained why the GI bill fight was worth fighting, even though Webb’s bill has already passed.

"Our defeat in Iraq would be catastrophic, not just for Iraq, but for us. I cannot be complicit in it. I will do whatever I can, whether I am effective or not, to help avert it," he said.

User Comments

Why don’t the republicans want Americans — especially our military men and women — to have an education?????
Obama ’08!

Posted by: Hope | May 26, 2008, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm

I have a lot of respect for people who serve this country.
Let me tell you, they currently have a lot of benefits. I work with a person who served for about 3 years and he is getting almost $50K in free education.
I do not mind giving them more benefits but do not want it to be a free money. I agree with McCain, get more with more years of service.

Posted by: Jack | May 26, 2008, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm

OK…lets look at McSame’s WATERED DOWN GI BILL:
stay with me here:
1) The McCain-Graham-Burr legislation creates a flat education benefit, not taking into account the cost of state colleges where veterans live. This would mean veterans in states where the cost of education is higher than the benefit would have go to into debt to get an education, or uproot themselves and their families to move to a place where the benefit would cover college. The Webb-Hagel Bill determines the education benefit based on the highest state college tuition in a veterans’ home state, allowing veterans to come home and attend college, without upheaval in their lives.
2) The McCain-Graham-Burr legislation creates second-class veterans, by offering those who serve in the military for 12 years the chance to transfer their education benefits to their children. This says to a veteran who serves for two years and loses both of his legs in combat that his service isn’t as valuable as someone who has served for longer.
3) The McCain-Graham-Burr legislation leaves the National Guard and Reserve out in the cold. In the current conflicts, the National Guard and Reserve have served faithfully alongside their active duty compatriots, and deserve equal benefits. Yet, the McCain bill does nothing to reward our Guard and Reservists for their cumulative service. Under the McCain bill, over 160,000 members of the Guard and Reserves who have done more than one tour in Iraq or Afghanistan would get no credit towards an education for their additional sacrifice.
ummm yeeeehhh…I think the Webb-Hagel bill pretty much BLOWS this one out the water…
Obama/Webb 08

Posted by: PaigeInPhilly | May 26, 2008, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm

I served my military honorably and must say, McCain couldn’t be any more wrong on this issue. If we had a retention problem before, wait and see what happens when this new G.I. Bill is shot down. This shows how out of touch this McCain is. It’s not about having served in the military, it’s the wisdom, stupid!

Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2008, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm

McCain is right. There has to be someway to tie the benefits to encouraging members to stay. Otherwise, who is going to stay in the military. Plus, currently, milary members already have GI bills.

Posted by: hannah | May 26, 2008, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm

McCain is right. Obama saying he doesn’t understand McCain’s position is either simply playing typical politics or is faking ignorance. Hey! Maybe he really doesn’t understand! Humm!

Posted by: LongT | May 26, 2008, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm

No Jane, it’s the decision to give the military more money without more service is stupid. Again, you already have GI bills. If there are more money to be given to you then you should commit longer. We are having a 2 wars. If most of members attend schools, then who is going serve?? With all due respects, people in general want to give the military members more benefits but then we don’t want them to go fight the wars. Then what is the point of giving the benefits and having the military.

Posted by: hannah | May 26, 2008, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm

While McCain frets that aiding our veterans will reduce enlistments….it’s good to know
that honorable, reasonable people are working to give back a measure of what the vets have given to us.

Posted by: Lee-Usa | May 26, 2008, 4:04 pm 4:04 pm

>>Again, you already have GI bills.<<
Have you read the current GI Bill? It has been decimated over the years. This new version RESTORES what has been taken away from our veterans.

Posted by: Lee-Usa | May 26, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm

I spent 25 years in the military. I am a disabled veterand and yes I have education benefits among others. I also served during the military’s gutting at the hands of President Clinton. We don’t need McCain doing the same thing. Every day in the military is dangerous simply because we work in an environment that is hazardous. Those who have never served simply do not understand!!

Posted by: Desert Storm Veteran | May 26, 2008, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm

Seems like we’re spread pretty thin these days with our military. Where would we have been without the horrible Stop Loss program? So what are our choices? Make it more lucrative to enlist or institute the draft. As the mother of a 21-year-old son and three potentially draft-eligible daughters, I’d prefer to make enlistment more appealing!

Posted by: louielouie | May 26, 2008, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm

John McCain’s foreign policy is grounded in the nightmare of his Viet-Nam experience as he continues to relive it even today.
Just ask him and he will tell you that even though we lost over 47,000 brave American military and suffered nearly 250,000 casualtiies and despite killing over 2,000,000 Vietnamese in the process, that we could have “won” in that tiny southeast Asian country ( who by the way, was no threat to the United States,) if we had just stayed another 100 years or so. ” The light at the end of the tunnel.”
This man is a relic of the past and has no business (except his corporate friend’s interests) of leading our country in a new direction. He is a mean spirited, angry old man who would better serve us by retiring to his luxurious ranch and tending to his barbecue and horses.
Not this time. We can’t afford the neanderthal Supreme Court Justices that he is sure to appoint, and the continued failed policies of the disaster named George Bush.

Posted by: Luke Gilmore | May 26, 2008, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm

hannah,
we could cut back on fighting wars to keep the costs down. time to let some other people fight their own wars, too.
Obama ’08!

Posted by: Peace | May 26, 2008, 4:45 pm 4:45 pm

McCain doesn’t mind cashing his $4,500 military retirement benefit every month, so why does he begrudge an education incentive for the young people risking their lives every day in Iraq?

Posted by: Javalation | May 26, 2008, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm

McCain should have supported the Webb GI Bill.
I hope that an Obama-Webb ticket happens and they BLAST McCain to high heaven.

Posted by: Brandon | May 26, 2008, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm

Not having studied S.22 more deeply I can quickly conclude that this bill was more generous in the amount of proposed educational benefits. It should be noted that this is not a “GI Bill” per se but is actually entitled “Post 9-11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act” covering only educational and housing benefits therein.
McCain’s bill provided transferability of benefits to spouses and children for members of the armed services that served six years while Webb’s bill does not address the issue of transferability of educational benefits. It also doesn’t account for the stark reality of retention of service members due to the three year qualification. The requirement in S.22 is that “veterans must have served at least three to thirty-six months of qualified active duty, beginning on or after September 11, 2001.” Notwithstanding the retention argument it could be said that McCain’s bill could have cost more due to the transferability feature to spouses and children.
Regardless, given the publicity surrounding S.22 and the associated title of “GI Bill” as well as the inability of the voting public to educate themselves on congressional matters, it seems as though Senator McCain should have withdrawn his bill in favor of Webb’s followed by a yea vote.

Posted by: Thunderbolt | May 26, 2008, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm

If you serve in a combat zone, you should get all of the benefits being a vet offers. If you put time in grade, you deserve more. But regardless of time in grade or duty location, the fact is education benefits everyone.
The GI bill (old one that is) helped educate millions of Americans, bringing them a better standard of living, better health care, better housing. The single-most beneficial thing you can do to a human being is educate them – and at only $50,000 per person (the cost of two years base pay), the benefits in greater tax revenues from higher incomes for better educated citizens far outweigh the costs.
Add to this the stimulation for recruitment and retention, getting REAL, tangible reward for serving (above the patriotic stuff which many don’t buy into anyhow), and the knowledge that the government actually WILL do as much for you as you do for it makes a HUGE amount of sense given the lack of interest the government has shown in meeting the needs of the most needy returning vets – the walking wounded, TBI cases and even healthy ones going to facilities that couldn’t legally house animals, let alone human beings.
If the government wants to stimulate recruitment, this is an excellent way to do it. In the long run, it will more than pay for itself. It remains to be seen if the government cares enough about the quality of its armed forces to do it.

Posted by: Fatesrider | May 26, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm

Other political articles on this website garner comments by the hundreds, yet this controversial article has only gotten a handful. I saw several thoughtful comments from Hil08 posted and then deleted. What is up with this? I’m pretty sure a lot of people have passionate feelings about this bill, particularly on Memorial Day.

Posted by: louielouie | May 26, 2008, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm

We cannot give away the bank. When all the money has been paid back that the US owes we will be a poor nation ourselves. Rev Wright has a 10 million dollar mansion and big expense account and he is Obama’s spiritual advisor and is like an uncle. Obama doesn’t understand about the budget.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm

I think we should give money to homeless people 1st and if there is any left give it for education.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

Voters should not give money to Obama’s campaign..this money should go to help veterans. Obama seems not to care about the veterans more than himself.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm

Any veteran who serves this country should get the best benefits period. Some feel that education benefits should be dependent on time spent in military and argue that we don’t want to make benefits too good because they won’t serve. I disagree. Our men and women can lose their lives at any time especially the ones that are serving in a war, so the least we can do is cover the cost of tuition.

Posted by: dotheresearch | May 26, 2008, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm

McCain’s bill is better it allows vets to transfer benefits to their families.
Webb’s bill is a disaster it doesn’t allow vets who are killed in action to transfer benefits to their families.
Obama is against allowing benefits for vets who are killed in action to be transferred to their family members.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

McCain is for more benefits than Webb’s bill.
McCain wants more benefits for the troops he is just against Webb’s crappy bill.
McCain wants veterans who are killed in action to be able to those benefits transferred to family members. Jim Webb and Obama are against that.
The media is silent on that.
McCain’s bill also gives more benefits for seniority. The military wants that.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm

John McCain is a hero and Obama should respect him and not say or do any thing that is in any way disrespectful toward him. Obama is not a hero but some might say he is kinda shady.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

Webb’s bill is not the bible.
McCain is for a better bill which allows benefits to be tranferred to other family members.
McCain is for a new GI bill.
The headline is misleading.
McCain’s bill is better than Webb’s.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

Barak Obama opposed military construction for new bases in the u.s
The dems last year blackmailed our soldiers. They said if the republicans didn’t allow a hate crime bill against gays they would block funding for construction of bases in the u.s.
Nancy Boyda voted against new funding for a base in kansas. Obama supported blocking funding for these new bases.
These were soldiers who just came back from iraq and the dems were against them sleeping in a better facility.
The dems are against the troops.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm

All you Obama/Webb fans I have news for you.
Obama will never pick Webb because Webb is against wholesale affirmative action.
Webb is pro second amendment while Obama is for the DC gun ban.
Obama is a marxist.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

The best thing McCain can do for retention of the troops is to end this war of Choice.
All veterans who served deserve equal treatment when comes to the GI Bill.
The last thing that is needed is a division among the Military

Posted by: Thinking | May 26, 2008, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

McCain and Hillary know about veterans but Obama has not been in Bosnia during turmoil. Obama just doesn’t have the experience to make judgements about money issues. He might let Rezco in the bank.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm

Obama is against allowing veterans to have their benefits transferred to other family members if they are killed in action.
The NY Times is silent on this.
This is a major reason why McCain is against the Webb Bill.
The Webb Bill doesn’t allow you to transfer benefits to family members.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm

Obama has been to Iraq once years ago.
McCain has been there 8 times.
McCain’s son just came back from Iraq.
McCain saw his wife cry at his son being away.
McCain will end the war the right way.
McCain hates war. McCain has seen the horrors of war.
Barry Obama is inexperienced he is the one who says we will invade Pakistan.
McCain has said he will turn over the areas to the iraqis to deal with the insurgency and bring our troops home. McCain was talking about keeping a small level of military advisors to train iraqis not combat troops.
The media has smeared McCain.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

For those of you who feels so compassionate for the veterans but turn around and called McCain a Fraud. You must have forgotten that McCain is a veteran himself and suffered for this country. His son, father and grandfather also fought and died for this country. How is that make him a Fraud and not make you feel compassionate about him as you claim you are for other veterans. No one disagree, including mccain, to give veterans the best they deserve, at the same time, however, enlisting encouragement is needed. Our military is volunteered. Would you be more happy if no one wants to enlist and there is a draft?? And how is it efficient to train someone and when that someone quits, you have to spend time again to train others. That in turn makes our army with always inexperienced combats. And the most important of all, McCain’s benefits will transfer to your family should something happens to you. Why do we buy life insurance? so that when we go, our spouse and kids have soemthing to live on. There’s nothing wrong with pay veterans more to encourage longer service and put a life insurance aside for the veterans’ families. What is wrong with that. If you’re not a veteran, then put that in business sense to make you understand better. On the surface, obama thinks he’s doing veterans a favor but in fact, he has absolutely no understanding whatever with the military and foreign policies.

Posted by: hannah | May 26, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

Obama is against the second amendment.
He calls the DC handgun ban constituational.
Then in the debate he wouldn’t answer the question.

Posted by: david | May 26, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

hannah, your post is correct. Obama could or could not be Muslim. There is no way to know until it’s too late.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm

Thinking – or No Thinking – You cannot just withdraw the troops. Didn’t obama said that he’ll withdraw the troops but will send them back if there’s AQ in Iraq?? if he’s willing to send our troops back then why withdraw now. If we had finished the Gulf war and kill Hussein then, we wouldn’t have had to enter Iraq again in the first place. read history. If you withdraw the troops now when we’re doing good and come back when terrorists are getting stronger, do you think that’s a good idea. Things like this obama doesn’t seem to understand. He never even voted “No” to invade Iraq because he wasn’t even a senator. He even said that he wouldn’t know what to do if he had to vote on it.

Posted by: hannah | May 26, 2008, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

If handguns are banned how will citizens defend themselves. Everyone has a right to defend themselves and thier family. Obama is an eletist and depends on someone else to defend him and his family. He is a friend of Rezco and Rezco will not attack him anyway.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

McCAIN COULD BE THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE. THERE’S NO WAY OF KNOWING UNTIL IT’S TOO LATE.

Posted by: Javalation | May 26, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

Threr was a time when someone was promised free medical care for life when they retired from the military. It was determined that recruiters had no authority to make such statements but it was determined that anyone who entered the service prior to 1956 was qualified for this entitlement. It didn’t happen. During Clinton’s administration those who retired and signed on to the Survivor’s Benefits Program which provided a portion of their retired pay to their spouse if they predeceased their spouse were to be able to have a paid up plan if they had paid in for 30 years and had reached the age of 70. Sounded good but that was 1998 and it was deferred until 2008. When we are burying 100+ a day how many do you think lasted until 80?

Posted by: Nick | May 26, 2008, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

Nick, If Hillary’s health care plan had passed those patriots would have been covered.

Posted by: Anders Scooper | May 26, 2008, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm

By opposing that bill, McInsane demonstrated again just how visionless, stubborn and mean spirited he is.
If military people aren’t now going to desert the military early for the sake of their family, do we expect that they would exit the military on account of a silly scholarship? Jeeeeeesh!
How freaking dumb is this man?
Moreover, when America goes to war for ‘legitimate’ causes, are there EVER any shortage of volunteers? NO!
If Americans stop filling recruitment offices around the country now, it is ONLY because of the incompetence and LACK OF LEADERSHIP of the so-called ‘commander-in-chief’; it is because of the LIES about the illegal and worthless war in Iraq!
Every good American leader WILL NEVER have problems recruiting Americans for just and wise causes.
McCain’t is an old visionless fool.
More reason for Americans to ignore his mindless bid for the Presidency.
America deserves a leader with visions of possibilities!
Americans don’t need another warmongering leader!

Posted by: Patriot | May 26, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

Would you be more happy if no one wants to enlist and there is a draft?
***************************************
In fact yes! If we had a draft we would not be in this war of Choice. Once people understand that it is their children who will pay for the political decisions, maybe they will be more attuned to their choices.

Posted by: Thinking | May 26, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm

John McCain wants to keep the college benefit of the GI Bill crummy enough so that soldiers will stay put rather than try and get an education. The gall of the man is revolting.

Posted by: FilmMD | May 26, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm

The Republicans soundly rejected McCain in the 2000 Presidential election. They claimed McCain was a weak, liberal candidate, and thus Bush propelled to the White House on the Republican ticket. Why should anyone now believe McCain has any chance at winning the election when the Republicans themselves through him in the garbage in 2000? The fact is, he is a weaker prospect than even Bush, and the Republicans themselves are the ones telling us this.

Posted by: Eric | May 26, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

I would vote for McCain in a heartbeat if he…had a plan for the economy, a plan for Iraq besides the same old, same old, a plan to help Americans in the health care crisis, a plan to move this country forward with jobs and prosperity, a plan to help our seniors, families, and everybody getting ripped off by big oil, a plan to bring back trust in government besides hiring all the lobbyest he surrounds himself with, a plan that is not the last guy’s plan, a plan to really help out working families, not the wealthy ones, a plan just for the sake of having a plan. Yeah, if he had all this, I would vote for him.

Posted by: Jake | May 26, 2008, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm

McCain is a rich man whose wife doesn’t even know whether they own 8 or 9 houses… he is far richer than the Clintons or Obama.
He has no clue that for many people enlisting in the military is the only hope they have of going to college – since they otherwise couldn’t afford an education.
He did not have to worry about whether he could afford the medical care to take care of his cancer.
Millions upon millions of our tax dollars are being used to not only fight the war in Iraq, but also to rebuild the same Iraq that we bombed…. and he is worried about restoring the GI Bill for veterans?

Posted by: susa | May 26, 2008, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm

All Mccain talks about is Iraq, Iraq, Iraq! What about the economy? What about domestic policy? Anyone who don’t believe that there is a connect between the billions of dollars spent each month to keep the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and the weak economy got to have their head checked or is drinking some spiked koolaid. The Republican party is one of war, war, war. If you like war then vote for McCain..If you don’t mind seeing some more of our wonderful young people die in Iraq and more in addition to the 25,000 who have been incapacitated by the stupid war then vote McCain. All he talks about is war..I am sick of it! People are losing jobs, many forclosures, the economy is in tatters..gas is expensive and McCain is talking about Iraq. wake up America! Vote Dems 08

Posted by: Earl | May 26, 2008, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm

McCain looks old and is living in the past. He wants to continue Bushes legacy of failure. If you want more war,vote McCain and watch as America goes further downhill.

Posted by: AJ | May 26, 2008, 8:28 pm 8:28 pm

Reading these comments was quite interesting until it turned from a discussion to bashing McCain and Obama. The topic is the GI Bill. It seems to me neither bill is a good bill. A combination of both is needed. Take some out of each and make a reasonable bill. Some really good education benefits no matter how long you are in the military, coupled with some added education benefits for longer service, and/or injury. Add in the benefits being transferrable in event of death or disability. Give these people the best of both. They deserve it. I have three brothers that served in Viet Nam. (It doesn’t matter now if you agree with that war or not, these men and others served their country.) The GI bill was a great thing for them, but one of them suffers terribly from effects of Agent Orange. Medical care for these men falls far short of what is deserved by all veterans. Lets quit bashing the people running for president and make the needs known instead. Contact your senators and representatives to get what the veterans deserve. Encourage some bipartisan creativity.

Posted by: Connie | May 26, 2008, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm

Again McCain doesn’t understand economics. If people know they only have to serve three years it will increase recruitment.
Some confuse supporting the Army, Navy and Marines with supporting the troops. They, the TROOPS want this bill, giving it to them is supporting them, refusing the bill in not supporting them.
McCain can say he supports the Department of Defense, but rejection of this bill does not exactly support the troops.
We owe these individuals for their sacrifice, not the Department of Defense.

Posted by: Scott | May 26, 2008, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm

Valjean, adding a differential based on whether the person served in a hostile, combat venue makes a lot of sense,too. Good idea.

Posted by: Connie | May 26, 2008, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm

I disagree with the venue aspect. You can only get the benefits if you are lucky enough to be called into a hostile zone. I don’t think that would help recruitment.
How about $5,000 in education for each time your shot at? If you can get people to sign up with that line your one hell of a sellsperson.

Posted by: Scott | May 26, 2008, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm

Plus, what’s a hostile zone? Is everywhere in Iraq the same? One could sigh up for the benefit and get shipped to a supportive assignment, where there’s no hostile action.

Posted by: Javalation | May 26, 2008, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm

McCain frets that aiding our veterans will reduce enlistments….it’s good to know that honorable, reasonable people, like Senators Obama and Webb, are working to give back a measure of what our vets have given to us.

Posted by: Lee-Usa | May 26, 2008, 9:00 pm 9:00 pm

I am a republican and I recently served in the military and for some people one term is enough. I support McCain, but I disagree here. To inspire people to serve one term and get worthwhile compensation is good. Four years of war is enough to effect a person for life. I think that our soldiers deserve more. No one fights war because it’s fun, we all want better lives and I think if more people served one term it would make for a healthier military and a more respectful community in America.

Posted by: Tim | May 26, 2008, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm

Sen. McCain failed to mention that a veteran who served 30 yrs woud receive LESS UNDER THE MCCAIN BILL
AND
MORE UNDER THE WEBB BILL
Quit lying Senator, let’s see some integrity.

Posted by: USMarine1171 | May 26, 2008, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm

McSame is a slave to the bankers, corporations, war profiteers and mercenaries. He will scrimp and cut anything that does not contriblute directly to the offshore bank accounts of his masters. Forget health care and veterans, hospitals and education- we need many many more bombs to make and many many more lives to snuff in Iran. That’s where your tax dollars will go.
Think of our soldiers being sent into yet another bloody quagmire in Iran and the power of your vote.

Posted by: LAsux | May 26, 2008, 11:47 pm 11:47 pm

Obama does not understand the differences. He needs more time to study to make up for his lack of experience. McCain believes in the GI Bill and educational opportunities, but he is looking at the total picture and the rebuilding of our military and our security in a dangerous world. Because of his experience, he sees a bigger picture. If I were an enlistee, I would leave after the first term. Why not? I’ve served my time.

Posted by: georgia | May 27, 2008, 12:01 am 12:01 am

Republicans have a better GI bill, one which does what GIs actually WANT, which is to provide portability of the education benefits.
So the question is, why are all the Democrats voting against portability, and for maximum benefits for GIs who quit after their first term?
The answer is clear — the Democrats want to encourage people to quit the military, so that we don’t have enough troops to continue the fight in Iraq and elsewhere.
The Webb GI bill will encourage experienced troops to abandon their units and leave the service in order to qualify for the new benefits, which in the end will mostly line the pockets of liberal professers and universities, who will raise their tuitions since so many veterans won’t be paying their own way.

Posted by: Charles | May 27, 2008, 12:06 am 12:06 am

The original GI Bill enriched our country after WW2 and set America on a path to unequaled prosperity. It was the greatest investment ever made and paid us back many times over.
The stingy NeoCons can’t fathom human investment…they just spend money like valley girls….without a clue where it comes from or what to so when the bills come due.

Posted by: Lee-Usa | May 27, 2008, 12:42 am 12:42 am

John McCain,Bush and all the other Neocons certainly don’t want educated soldiers,then the troops will be wiser to all the Neocons lies to start more wars and extend the ones we already have. The only military related people John McCain wants to help are his military contractor friends. Republicans want our troops to fight their wars,but never support them once they are injured.These are the people who vote against benefits for our proud warriors. Being a former vet,this make me sick!

Posted by: AJ | May 27, 2008, 1:25 am 1:25 am

Clearly republicans have use soldiers and the military as fodder giving lip service to their concerns. Misusing their patriotic service for political purposes.

Posted by: LG | May 27, 2008, 2:50 am 2:50 am

Charles … I wasn’t going to post to this discussion until I read your post, and got violently ill! I happen to be one of those “free loading family members” you refer to, who isn’t contributing anything and is only living off what the government gives me.
Let me start off by saying obviously you have never served your country, otherwise you wouldn’t sound so ignorant about what military families mean to this country.
My husband has been in the US Army for 12 years, and he’s served that long not because he’s afraid of trying to make it in the civilian world, not because he has no drive to make something of himself in the civilian world, and not because he’s afraid of college, but because he feels that it’s not only his right, but his HONOR to serve the country he lives in and loves.
During my husbands last deployment, I earned my Associates Degree while working full time and raising our two children by myself. Yet, according to you, I contribute nothing to this country. What about the blood, sweat, and tears shed during my husbands deployment? What about the nights of worry and wonder if he’s alive? What about the nights I’ve set up with my oldest calming his fears about his father’s deployment? What about the 40+ hours I worked outside the home and the 100+ hours I worked inside the home every week my husband was deployed taking care of our family? Do they really count for nothing in your eyes? Or perhaps it’s your lack of knowledge about how real military families work that has caused you to make such broad false statements. I pay taxes, just like you do, as does my husband. His pay is NOT tax free, unless he is deployed, and quite honestly, I’d rather pay the taxes year round and have him home safe at my side, than get the barely more than $600 extra a month we get when he’s deployed. Is $600 extra a month really worth his life? I think not.
My husband is a 2 time combat veteran who has been injured in the line of duty, has received a Purple Heart, and who has made national news. My husband gets up every morning and puts on the uniform of a solider so you can sit behind your computer screen and spout off at the mouth bashing men and women like him for doing a job that they LOVE. My husband has had one career goal in his entire life, to retire from the United States Army. Why? Not because he is afraid as you suggested, but because he loves his country, and feels that the best way to show it is to serve. If it weren’t for men and women like my husband, you might have had to be drafted and sent to Iraq where you could have been hurt, or worse maimed, or even worse, killed. Perhaps a “thank you” wouldn’t be too much for you to utter the next time you see a man or woman in uniform.
As far as your comment that the only time the military is appreciated is during Memorial Day and the 4th of July, again, you are wrong. My husband can not walk down the streets of our hometown without people stopping to shake his hand and tell him how much they appreciate the sacrifices he’s made to defend their freedoms. My husband can not walk into a dining establishment without men and women jumping at the opportunity to pay for his meal. My family can not shop in a store without someone coming up to us to thank ME and MY CHILDREN for standing behind OUR soldier while he goes off to fight for their freedoms. Soldiers are appreciated every day of the year, by those individuals that have respect for other human beings. It is individuals like yourself, who have nothing better to do than to bash the military because you don’t agree with the war, that give us TRUE Americans a bad name.
Do the benefits that the military receive suck? Yes, but so do the benefits that civilians who have worked for the same company for 30 years and then get down sized because they are within a few years of retirement. How about the benefits of single parents who don’t have the opportunity to go to college and are working in a fast food joint because they aren’t qualified to be a white collar worker? Do their benefits suck? Well, if they had benefits, yeah, they probably would suck.
My husband is a SOLDIER and as such, he deserves more respect than you apparently can muster. Perhaps you should take a moment and think about the reason you’re able to sit behind your computer and spew forth hate and misery. It’s because a SOLDIER who serves in a military you obviously don’t think is worth a darn died to provide you with that freedom.
As for the educational benefits, I think the more benefits we can give our men and women in uniform the better. Yes, the pay sucks, yes, the benefits are lacking, yes, they technically work for less than minimum wage when you add up all the hours worked and divide it by the amount they are paid every month. But, it shouldn’t matter if they serve 1 year or 100 years, they are soldiers, and they deserve the best that this country has to offer them.
And that, as they say, is all I have to say on that matter.

Posted by: A Grunts Wife | May 27, 2008, 3:04 am 3:04 am

My apologies to Charles. I mistook your name being above the post I responded to as you having been the one to write it.
My post should have been directed at Joel.
Please do accept my apologies.

Posted by: A Grunts Wife | May 27, 2008, 3:07 am 3:07 am

“Attention McCain” I guess you dont support are Soldiers as much as you say you do! The news has even aired Soldiers story’s about some of them with serveral tours in Iraq who want out but the Military wont let them.Iraq wont even step up and take over,and why woudl they when it is our Soldiers who are dieing for them.And yet you want to stay in Iraq for years to come.Sorry McCain but you are out of touch with the American Soldier!

Posted by: Demo Rules | May 27, 2008, 6:56 am 6:56 am

I think the GI bill should cover both the educational benefits(even for one time enlistments) and have the benefits covering the families to be transfered in case of death. Those who make the military a life time career do deserve more benefits than a one time enlistment.

Posted by: AnnD52 | May 27, 2008, 7:24 am 7:24 am

Anyone thought that improving the GI Bill may help bring more recruits into the military to GET the benefits? Or does McCain just WANT an endless an war? Oh wait, I just answered my questioned.

Posted by: Dali | May 27, 2008, 7:42 am 7:42 am

First– It has never been the military’s position to keep service members “long term.” While they want people to serve as long as their is war– they will want to get rid of them as soon as the war is over. And the cycle will continue again.
As retired military, and someone who worked in recruiting, the investment in personnel is repaid after the first enlistment. The larger the investment, the longer the first enlistment.
A comprehensive bill will encourage better recruiting, create educated and productive citizens, and create influencers that will encourage others to join.
McCain’s adjustment to the bill works on the fear created by the military system.
1) Giving full benefits for those who have done 12 years or more negates the equal sacrifice given to those who have served 12 months or 11 years. Soldiers who will have certainly put themselves in danger in the name of national interest.
2) Offering the G.I. Bill to spouses, will keep the service member in a weak economic position and diminish his marketability in the civilian market.
3) Service members are partially sequestored from the civilian world. They have very little confidence in the great skills they have developed in the military. This keeps Soldiers in a mindset they are not marketable in the civilian sector. Anyone who does not have a bachelor’s degree knows that their ability to get interviewed for a job is significantly reduced. These Soldiers without a degree know this and will feel that they do not have a “choice” to get out of the military.
Currently, less than 30 percent of G.I.s use their G.I. Bill. That is because the system is unwieldy, the $39-45k in benefits do not cover full tuition, books and living expenses. Most veterans are married with children by the time they leave the military they cannot support their family and go to school full time.
The benefits that veterans receive are erroded every day. They get minimal dental for their family while serving. They get very few benefits when they get out (before retirement). The VA services are dimmished on a daily basis (look at McCain’s voting record and you will see he has voted down every VA spending bill this century).
Many businesses do not follow USERRA and are not rehiring the reservists that have deployed. Many that do “follow the law” know there are a lot of loopholes to get rid of excess employees (and they are excess because the company had to hire to fill the positions while the military member was gone).
Anyone that has served in the military knows the score. We are asked to work for lower wages, add stress on our families, and sacrifice our life for the promise that when we are done we will be taken care of by the military through opportunity programs. The most important of these is the G.I. Bill.
It is very clear to everyone when Secretary of Defense Gates says “we can’t give them these benefits because they will use them,” he means that we should offer benefits that “appear” to offer education opportunity, but not offer real opportunity to our service members so they will remain in a position of feeling unprepared for civilian life.
You do not need a comprehensive G.I. Bill to encourage people to leave the military. 70-80 percent leave every year. All you need is a military campaign that has no clear mission, with no clear solution, with no clear end, that taxes the hearts and minds of our Soldiers with extended deployments and vague promises of “victory” without a definition of “success.”

Posted by: Joshua Hudson | May 27, 2008, 8:38 am 8:38 am

After serving 26 years and using every ounce of my VA benifits I am trilled to see another of Sen. McCain’s plans! He is the whole person concept and the President we all need. So, you anti-americans posting your mock comments on this site should realize the rest of us Americans don’t buy your psuedo-intelligence.

Posted by: David McCarthy | May 27, 2008, 9:02 am 9:02 am

People who serve in the military deserve a good well rounded GI Bill. Webb’s GI bill fits that mold. Give our Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, and Coast Guard the bennies for a job well done. Support Webb’s version of the New GI Bill. That is how you show true gratitude for our military and the people who choose to serve.

Posted by: Old Soldier | May 27, 2008, 10:22 am 10:22 am

Let’s give our veterans what they deserve. McCain can wrap it up any way he wants to – but our volunteer forces sacrifice DEEPLY and get paid barely anything and their housing is horrible. The least we can do is offer them an education – just like we did with our WWII vets.
Semper Fi Sen. Webb.

Posted by: Alicia | May 27, 2008, 11:41 am 11:41 am

We as a people are at a defining moment or Choice for our planet — that of right human relations with people everywhere in the world (that means talking to them) or the possible annihilation of our planet due to men with war-mongering minds who want to try and delude us that continuation of wars with all the nuclear bombs out there will not somehow escalate into a full-blown war of these nuclear and atomic bombs which will surely bring about the destruction of the earth! So the question is, will we and can we chose peace and diplomacy or instead be led towards a steady drumbeat march toward wars and an eventual nuclear proliferation. It is our choice after all!
And maybe in a thoughtful exit strategy out of the occupation of Iraq, which is not surrender because you can’t surrender from an occupation, we will not only find our self-dignity and respect again, we will find our souls.

Posted by: Angellight | May 27, 2008, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm

I CANT BELIEVE ALL THE LIES COMING FROM MCCAIN!!!
SEN AGREED TO AMEND THE WEBB BILL TO PROVIDE TRANSFERABILITY TO DEPENDENTS
STOP LYING SENATOR!!!

Posted by: USMarine1171 | May 27, 2008, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm

*Sen. Warner*

Posted by: USMarine1171 | May 27, 2008, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm

The amendment Warner is offering, which has the support of transferability skeptics such as Sen. Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee chairman, is not at all what the Pentagon has been seeking.
The Pentagon plan calls for all service members who are eligible for GI Bill benefits to be able to transfer half of their entitlement to a spouse or children after six years of service and to be able to transfer all of their benefits after 12 years of service, which defense officials said would be strong encouragement to remain in the military.

Posted by: USMarine1171 | May 27, 2008, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm

Here then John McCain, why not follow yout own ideals and add to that same bill… all congressman must be elected to more than one term to receive any retirement and benefits that are currently given to one term senators, also add GW’s language that benefits will not be given to current Congressman until they are relected to another term…………

Posted by: Bully | July 27, 2008, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

reinstate the draft and see how many right wingers support the occupaion of Iraqi as well as the negligence in not increasing benefits to soldiers………….

Posted by: Bully | July 27, 2008, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm

Wish I had even drawn my full GI Bill–a vet counselor at my school told me my entitlement was the full 10years past date of separation. I had a break in service and he didn’t count it in. Had to pull out of a MSc after the 1st semester wasn’t reimbursed.
But, I used my 75% tuition assistance while I was in. I would have loved to pass on my GI benefits to my kid.
Having been a recruiter (AF) and seeing the Army having so much difficulty with retention with the educational bonus babies, I’d lean more towards McCain.

Posted by: Scott | July 30, 2008, 1:53 am 1:53 am

The REAL point has nothing to do with the GI Bill but has more to do with the lower living conditions I had to accept while serving in the Army.
We need someone to take a LONG HARD look at what our soldiers have to deal with while serving our country.
Also, most of you may be unaware that these “benefits” are perishable. In other words if a soldier waits to use the educational benefits to be able to better afford what they do not cover, like me they may find they evaporate to NOTHING..
I was very disapointed to discover I had none of the benefits I had earned after having been shot at in defense of my country..
Give them better housing, better Medical care, and make those educational benefits good for the life of the soldier, or transferable to spouses, or children. Only then will you be rewarding thier service, which is what they are inteded to do.
McCain has turned his back on his fellow veterans with his suggestion to anything less than this.
But voting for Obama is not an acceptable option for many, many, many, reasons. The least of which is his obvious inexperiance, and the poor policy his campaign is based on.
McCain should reward those that serve thier country the same way he serves. He should push for further benefits for soldiers, and other people that make this a better country. Rewarding people that start businesses that put Americans to work, as well as those who support, and defend those citizens is the only way to go.

Posted by: Wayne | September 8, 2008, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.