Yesterday VoteVets.org delivered a petition with 30,000 signatures to the office of Senator John McCain. Through that petition, we asked him to support Senator Jim Webb's new GI Bill. And less than 24 hours later, we have an answer:
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, seemed to give a thumbs down to bipartisan legislation that would greatly expand educational benefits for members of the military returning from Iraq and Afghanistan under the GI Bill.
McCain indicated he would offer some sort of alternative to the legislation to address concerns that expanding the GI Bill could lead more members of the military to get out of the service.
Both Democratic presidential candidates - Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., - have signed on as co-sponsors, and the bill has gained bipartisan support from 54 senators on Capitol Hill in addition to Webb.
The reason for McCain's refusal to support the bill is about the most disturbing rationale one could imagine.
Officials in charge of Pentagon personnel worry that a more generous and expansive GI Bill would create an incentive for troops to get out of the military and go to college.
Right. God forbid.
At this point, John McCain has fully embraced the "less jobs and more war" philosophy. Essentially, he's offering troops the opportunity to sacrifice more for fewer incentives. With the Bush administration's help, McCain is telling America's troops, "Thanks for your service and your three combat tours in five years. Now get back to work."
Unfortunately, this smacks of that special brand of neo-con arrogance for which Donald Rumsfeld was known: The one that says we're the government and you should be thankful we give you anything. This is the attitude that brought us "You go to war with the Army you have. . .not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time."
This mentality is antithetical to the intent of the GI Bill when it was first introduced in 1944. At that time--and as Jim Webb has stressed--the purpose of the bill was to ensure that troops who'd fulfilled their service obligations would be entitled to a full education at the expense of the government. The bill was signed into law and functioned that way for decades. Since last year, Jim Webb has simply been attempting to update the GI Bill so that it meets with the original intent in a modern economy.
Now, it seems, John McCain wants to change that intent by moving the goalposts--and by making life as a civilian so difficult for returning troops that they have no choice but to stay in. The idea being promoted by McCain and the Bush administration is that by making the GI Bill pay out so little--by making it basically useless--the troops will have no choice but to stay in the military.
That's why Jon Soltz and General Wesley Clark (ret.) countered last week in the Los Angeles Times,
First, it is morally reprehensible to fix the system so that civilian life is unappealing to service members, in an attempt to force them to re-up. Education assistance is not a handout, it is a sacred promise that we have made for generations in return for service.
Second, falling military recruitment numbers are just as serious as retention problems. To send the message that this nation will not help you make the most of your life will dissuade a large number of our best and brightest from choosing military service over other career options.
And it's here that Clark and Soltz bring up a key point: The McCain/Pentagon plan to allow the GI Bill to die a slow death is, in effect, a frontal assault on military recruiters who already face stiff resistance from families over an unpopular war. By not bringing the GI Bill up to date, recruiters are literally being forced to offer potential sign-ups more opportunities to sacrifice with fewer incentives. As if our recruiters needed to have their jobs made more difficult.
At bottom, John McCain simply doesn't support the troops. He has no problem forcing the Army to conduct multiple 15-month-long tours without minimal dwell time. He has no problem voting against VA medical care funding. And he certainly has no issues with the U.S. military staying in Iraq for a hundred years. The only thing it seems John McCain has a problem with is appreciating the service and sacrifice of those who've served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is truly disgusting when you think about it. And I'm not sure how Republicans can defend this. As combat veterans, all we're asking is that we get a fair deal: We'll serve at least three years--facing stop-losses, unexpected mobilizations, injuries, broken relationships, and death--and all we ask is for the government to put us through school and provide us with medical care when--and if--we return.
It's too bad we can't count on a fellow combat veteran like John McCain. |
