Your data is a bit dated, worth mentioning is the steep decline in these numbers due to Iraq: In addition, aside from paying massive retention bonuses, I understand the army has had tremendous difficulty in retaining its mid-level officers which promises a dearth of senior officers in the future.
Good point. It's rather telling (IMO) that post-9/11 the number of recruits with college degrees swelled, and then correspondingly plummeted as the dysfunctional and disengenuous details of the Iraq adventure became clear.
He's had the bill in front of him for months... People from both parties are in favor of this bill. If McCain wanted alternatives he could have proposed at least one by now. He hasn't done anything other than to oppose this bill, and make promises about what he'll do in the future. He sat on it without giving it a thumbs up or thumbs down for 1/4 of a year, and finally comes out and opposes it, and says something about finding alternatives which will then have to go through committee again, take many many more months. I'm sorry but that's not being supportive, and I'm not ignoring it.
Please see my above post. The only one who's been ignoring anything on this is McCain. He's had the bill for months, and has proposed exactly zero alternatives. He isn't being supportive, and just wasting time. The bill has bipartisan support. It isn't some crackpot meaningless gesture.
So one was tortured and they attempted to brainwash him by the commies, while the other one expanded his experiences to be better prepared to deal with a global village. Obama...winner, winner, chicken dinner. DD
The GI Bill, while needing improvement is not on life support, c'mon...This is not Senator Frist operating on Patreaus at Vanderbilt as you may spin it...This is getting it done right, and in accordance with an incentive to stay in the military as well...Military leaders are the ones in favor of an alternative to the flawed propsed bill...There is no reason for McCain to address this till after the election is completed...
Gives troops more incentives not to re-up and opt out for a college education. Gives troops more incentives not to re-up and opt out for a college education. He is voting against it mostly due to the side effect of reducing the military ranks. Any bets that McCain's alternative will be to resubmit the same bill after we have left Iraq?
There are soldiers now who could use the GI Bill to help them get an education. The more you wait, the more soldiers you are leaving out. That isn't supporting the troops to the best. He's had month after month to approve, or come up with alternatives. He's done nothing. Our soldiers deserve better, or does support only mean keeping them in harms way longer, and not extend to any benefits?
FB, I was reading a piece in the tennessean yesterday on this,...These troops utilize the GI Bill as it is now,...You speak as if there is NO benefits at all. They are thankful for it, I have read so. We could probably do a thread topic on the rising costs of tuition and why it happens, but yes the fact is tuition rate increases happen, the GI Bill should do two things: #1 better assist monetary funding than it does now,...#2 involve incentive for retainment in the military...#2 has got to happen. McCain stated he is working on #2...The real question is why haven't the others made #2 a reality in all these months? If all we do is focus on #1, then we do a disservice to the military...
They can get an education under the current GI Bill, if they contribute to it. The new one opens up a few more choices of where to go. The issue for me is the inclusion of some of those who never contributed anything. Many of those reject the GI Bill because they plan to go career military. Now, I certainly understand military personnel changing their mind about their job as a career choice, but instantly offering them the GI Bill as a free benefit that they have declined as a contributory benefit would give them aditional motivation to leave, which we can't really afford right now.
Because there are many other more efficient ways to work on #2, and that shouldn't be the purpose of the GI bill. The GI bill should be about improving the education options and availability for servicemen. A great way to work on #2 would be to conclude our business in Iraq and focus on going after the terrorists responsible for 9/11. That would help far more than just about anything that GI bill could do. There is already such a large amount of bi-partisan support for the GI bill that a change isn't really needed.
Great it should... and to a large extent it does, but it should not be expanded in a way which negatively affects military retention...It is idiotic... The problem is NO ONE WILL commit to this by 2013...NO ONE WILL commit to a conclusion of troops in Iraq in a generous 5 year span...Get it? What would help much better than your proposal is to support the efforts of the troops and give Gen. Patraeus everything he needs to succeed...10,000+ troops have signed on to VVF...Many of the founders are combat veterans with multiple tours...For some strange reason, they think they can have success...Imagine that. No one wants to be there for 100 years, but no war had an expiration date attached to it...For awhile, it looked like we wouldn't win the Revolutionary war...I can't say enough for the will power of the American troops who have proven themselves, time, and time again....
for shame! -- via HufPo Bush Wrongly Credits McCain For 'Working Hard' On G.I. Bill President George W, Bush wasn't exactly a friend to the efforts put forth by Senators Jim Webb (D-VA) and John Warner (R-VA) as they worked to secure bipartisan, veto-proof support for an updated U.S. G.I. Bill, which would provide our veterans with enhanced educational opportunities. But Bush is stuck with the bill now, so naturally, he went in front of the press and deemed himself pleased with its passage. It didn't escape our attention though, that as Bush acknowledged the House and Senate members who came together to support the bill, he slipped in the name of one who labored to obstruct the bill -- Senator John McCain. Instead of being rightly excluded from the list of thanks, McCain was given the same credit as those who had steered the passage of the bill from day one. Surely, though, John McCain will correct the President, because STRAIGHT TALK, RIGHT? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/30/bush-wrongly-credits-mcca_n_110024.html
The GI Bill has become an issue in Texas with Senator Cornyn a very late convert, to put it charitably, now trying to act like he was always for it. The next thing he will be claiming to be a leader in getting it passed. It is good to to see the troops get some more benefits even if McCain, Bush and Cornyn are irritating when they pretend that they were supportive.
The quote will go something like... I can't imagine where you got the idea I oppose this bill. That's absurd! I've never said such a thing. and the media will go... my bad
Pretty big stretch for some of you guys to conclude that he is against GI benefits from this newsbite. If a Congressman proposes a different bill or an amended bill to one under consideration, that doesn't mean they are against the principle/point of the bill. Didn't see where that said anything about Iraq.
Didn't this story break about 3wks ago. I remember reading an article that explained the differences between this bill & the one McCain was proposing, but it did state that he had a different bill already outlined. If I remember correctly, McCain's benefits were tiered depending on the # of years the person spent in the service. More years = more money. Thus, the incentive to stay in longer. I'll try to find the original, less biased story.
