PDA

View Full Version : S. 22, The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007


paprikapink
10-10-2007, 11:48 AM
See post #5, below (or above, depending on how you thread).

tourdeforce
10-10-2007, 06:07 PM
Luckily, there are always loopholes which allow people to be screwed over.

When they came home from Iraq, 2,600 members of the Minnesota National Guard had been deployed longer than any other ground combat unit. The tour lasted 22 months and had been extended as part of President Bush's surge.

1st Lt. Jon Anderson said he never expected to come home to this: A government refusing to pay education benefits he says he should have earned under the GI bill.

"It's pretty much a slap in the face," Anderson said. "I think it was a scheme to save money, personally. I think it was a leadership failure by the senior Washington leadership... once again failing the soldiers."

Anderson's orders, and the orders of 1,161 other Minnesota guard members, were written for 729 days.

Had they been written for 730 days, just one day more, the soldiers would receive those benefits to pay for school.

http://www.wcsh6.com/news/national/article.aspx?storyid=71741


Who said that Bush and his military advisors did not plan ahead for the endgame?

As far as this plan is concerned, mission accomplished.

jodiodi
10-10-2007, 07:41 PM
As the spouse of a retired army vet, I say those who serve deserve everything they can get. I've seen first-hand how little the soldiers actually get while in the service. Though many would say the benefits are better than those in the civilian world, the risks are higher and they're actually working 24/7. Not enough money in the world would make up for all the BS they have to go through, much less what they make on Active Duty. Then, when they retire or get out, they still have several years left when they can be recalled. My husband had 10 years on his IRR status (I think it's down to 8 yr, 4 months now) so every time we get mail from DoD, I cringe.

paprikapink
10-10-2007, 11:11 PM
Luckily, there are always loopholes which allow people to be screwed over.


That is way wrong. This story is fresh; so I'm holding out hope that now that it's broken, it'll be righted. Thanks for pointing it out, TdF.

paprikapink
04-29-2008, 11:25 PM
Bumping this thread.

The new GI Bill is still facing opposition. Let's face it, $9,000 a year (what soldiers are currently offered) won't really get a person a college education, will it? This has got to change. VoteVets.org offers an easy way to write to your local paper to express your support for our troops. Got the sticker? Back it up!

I just used the Letter-to-the-Editor tool at VoteVets.org to write a letter about the GI Bill.
Please help support the GI Bill for our troops by visiting VoteVet.org and sending a letter to the editor of your local paper. CLICK HERE (http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1138/letter/?letter_KEY=428) to visit VoteVets.org and send a letter to your paper.

paprikapink
05-06-2008, 07:46 PM
Here's an excerpt from an informative OpEd in the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/opinion/06herbert.html?th&emc=th) about the importance of the new GI Bill:

Referring to the GI Bill of WWII: “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.”

NikeeGoddess
05-06-2008, 07:57 PM
you know i did see something on the news about this dwindling GI Bill. but i think the bigger problem is the distribution of benefits given to the military. some complain that soldiers don't make a lot of money but if they take advantage of all the benefits then they really come out ahead. when a marine colleague of mine told me his wife had two tummy tucks, one after each child, fully paid for, i was like... huh?! that ain't right -- elective, luxury surgery for the wife of a soldier?!! based on this one little thing i've come to the conclusion that the military needs to re-examine the distribution of benefits.

paprikapink
05-06-2008, 08:03 PM
[...] i was like... huh?! that ain't right -- elective, luxury surgery for the wife of a soldier?!! based on this one little thing i've come to the conclusion that the military needs to re-examine the distribution of benefits.

Luxury surgery seems like a dumb thing, yeah, but how does the fact that her husband's a soldier factor in? As in, soldiers should be kept poor so they can't be this stupid? Or, I'm paying that soldier's salary, so it should only go to things I approve? That's probably not what you meant, but that's what it reads like.

Siddow
05-06-2008, 08:07 PM
My insurance won't pay for elective surgery like that. Why should my taxes pay for a soldier's wife to have it?

Siddow
05-06-2008, 11:31 PM
Because you don't volunteer to go get shot at to protect a person's right to have insurance.

Last I checked I don't have a 'right' to insurance. I have the 'opportunity to purchase'. :)

Snowstorm
05-07-2008, 12:35 AM
you know i did see something on the news about this dwindling GI Bill. but i think the bigger problem is the distribution of benefits given to the military. some complain that soldiers don't make a lot of money but if they take advantage of all the benefits then they really come out ahead. when a marine colleague of mine told me his wife had two tummy tucks, one after each child, fully paid for, i was like... huh?! that ain't right -- elective, luxury surgery for the wife of a soldier?!! based on this one little thing i've come to the conclusion that the military needs to re-examine the distribution of benefits.

Major military medical centers have plastic surgeons on staff, not to perform tummy tucks on dependents but to repair damage to active duty personnel who have been hurt (accidents, explosions, bullet wounds, etc..). But they're not always busy (I heard about this many years ago when I was stationed in Germany) and if they have time, they'll keep their skills sharp by doing elective surgery. Perhaps this is how she had her surgeries.

benbradley
05-07-2008, 12:49 AM
Last I checked I don't have a 'right' to insurance. I have the 'opportunity to purchase'. :)
This could change, as soon as next January 20...

paprikapink
05-07-2008, 01:07 AM
Last I checked I don't have a 'right' to insurance. I have the 'opportunity to purchase'. :)

That's true. Maybe the sentiment behind ToddWBush's reply could also be expressed as "Let's have a different scale for those who volunteer to be shot at to protect a person's right to {fill in the blank}."