Scooter
10-26-2006, 06:15 PM
An interesting Article appeared today in the LA Times today.
The Bush Administration is not fully funding, and has called for cutbacks to the GI Bill, calling the program a "Budget Buster."
The Bill, proposed by FDR in the 1940's orignally paid for 100% of all college education anywhere the Soldier could get accepted, as well as low cost home loans. Today's Veterans top out at $36,000 for a four-year degree — barely enough to cover the average state university and well short of UCLA's $19,500 annual tuition, room and board. Forget about the private colleges once covered by the GI Bill — $36,000 would pay for less than year at some of them.
Reservists and National Guard troops in Iraq receive only 27% of the benefits Veterans hospitals caring for the wounded of Iraq and Afghanistan are $3 billion short.
The GI Bill had, and has, huge benefits to the economy. For every dollar paid out under the original GI Bill, there was a $7 return to the economy in terms of increased earnings, consumer spending and tax revenue, according to a 1988 congressional study.
So, on the one hand we ask our soldiers to make the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation and the War on Terror yet when the come home they can barely get an education, and Reservists get less than a third. As you know, the Reservists and Guard troops are a significant part of our force over there.
So what say you fiscal conservatives? To heck with the troops? The Budget is more important than our brave men? Are the troops no-deposit no return humans?
And for the military hawks out there? To support the troops means writing a pretty big check, are you ready for this? Can you put your money where your mouth is?
I say, if a guy is willing to give his life for his country for crap wages and no insurance, then we ought to pay for his education. I say increase funding and it would attract more and better qualified soldiers who will stay longer without six figure re-enlistment bonuses currently being paid.
The Bush Administration is not fully funding, and has called for cutbacks to the GI Bill, calling the program a "Budget Buster."
The Bill, proposed by FDR in the 1940's orignally paid for 100% of all college education anywhere the Soldier could get accepted, as well as low cost home loans. Today's Veterans top out at $36,000 for a four-year degree — barely enough to cover the average state university and well short of UCLA's $19,500 annual tuition, room and board. Forget about the private colleges once covered by the GI Bill — $36,000 would pay for less than year at some of them.
Reservists and National Guard troops in Iraq receive only 27% of the benefits Veterans hospitals caring for the wounded of Iraq and Afghanistan are $3 billion short.
The GI Bill had, and has, huge benefits to the economy. For every dollar paid out under the original GI Bill, there was a $7 return to the economy in terms of increased earnings, consumer spending and tax revenue, according to a 1988 congressional study.
So, on the one hand we ask our soldiers to make the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation and the War on Terror yet when the come home they can barely get an education, and Reservists get less than a third. As you know, the Reservists and Guard troops are a significant part of our force over there.
So what say you fiscal conservatives? To heck with the troops? The Budget is more important than our brave men? Are the troops no-deposit no return humans?
And for the military hawks out there? To support the troops means writing a pretty big check, are you ready for this? Can you put your money where your mouth is?
I say, if a guy is willing to give his life for his country for crap wages and no insurance, then we ought to pay for his education. I say increase funding and it would attract more and better qualified soldiers who will stay longer without six figure re-enlistment bonuses currently being paid.