How many ways can one shaft America’s veterans? Let me count the ways. 

First, when on active duty send them to fight in a war that need never have been fought. Second, after deploying them to a combat zone increase the odds of their being wounded or killed by providing inadequate or non-existent equipment such as lack of properly armored vehicles or no body armor. Third, increase the odds against them by failing to promptly recognize new threats such as improvised explosive devices. Fourth, after they have been wounded give them a lack of proper facilities in which to recover, as evidenced by the Walter Reed scandal. Fifth, be inexplicably slow to recognize or screen for, let alone treat, neurological injuries from bomb blasts, which have become the war’s signature injury. Sixth, due to an inadequate military mental health system, fail to recognize increased suicidal tendencies on the part of returning veterans. These, by the way, are not all the ways I could list. 

And, if all that isn’t enough to screw veterans who just want to get on with their life and rejoin the society they fought for, one can always screw them over by providing inadequate educational benefits. 

Which brings us to what should be a bipartisan no-brainer, but sadly, isn’t. As Henny Youngman would say, take my GI Bill, please. That venerable institution, dating back to the WWII era has been modified numerous times over the years.

When I did my undergraduate work at the end of 70s and early 80s it was very helpful, but hardly sufficient. Since then, its relative contribution, as a percentage of overall educational costs has declined.

If a veteran is lucky he or she may get enough to cover about 60% of the costs of the average four-year public college. Currently, active-duty members who have continuously served for at least two years, and who forfeit $1,200 of their pay in one year, are entitled to receive $1,101 a month as a full-time student for up to 36 months, which is equivalent to four academic years.

Just about every thoughtful and knowledgeable observer recognized that it needs major reworking. Hence new legislation, S. 22, sponsored by Sen. James Webb (D-VA) which would cover up to the full cost of a four-year education at a public college. 

Webb’s bill would give vets about $2,000 for every month spent in college, or enough to cover the most expensive four-year public university. Veterans would also receive $1,000 yearly stipends for books and a $1,000 monthly housing allowance. 

Supporters, say it would give today’s veterans the same educational opportunities that the original GI bill provided to World War II veterans. This bill is endorsed by both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton.

Critics say the estimated cost, an estimated $51.8 billion in the next 10 years, would increase an unsustainable mountain of debt. But that amounts to only a bit over four months of what we spend now fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But the White House and the Pentagon oppose the bill, saying it would be too expensive and could make it harder for the military to retain troops in a time of war. Sen. John McCain, normally a dependable member of the nothing is too good for our boys and girls crowd, plans to sponsor a competing bill that would provide a smaller initial increase but raise the award after 12 years of service to encourage retention in the armed services.

Under McCain’s plan veterans leaving active service would see their monthly education benefits rise to $1,500, enough to cover the average public university. To boost retention, this plan would allow members who served six years or more to transfer part or all their post-service education benefits to a spouse or child.

Sen. McCain is not averse to talking trash to try and gain support for his bill. A recent article by Politico.com documented the debate between him and Webb. 

McCain told the Politico that “there are fundamental differences. [Webb's bill] creates a new bureaucracy and new rules. His bill offers the same benefits whether you stay three years or longer. We want to have a sliding scale to increase retention. I haven’t been in Washington, but my staff there said that his has not been eager to negotiate.” 

Evidently Sen. McCain has abandoned his Straight Talk persona. Webb  replied, “He’s so full of it. I have personally talked to John three times. I made a personal call to [McCain aide] Mark Salter months ago asking that they look at this.” 

At the heart of the difference between the two is that McCain believes Webb’s bill will hurt the military’s retention of soldiers, by making service a pseudo-way station to a free college education. McCain supports legislation that would link benefits to the amount of time a soldier has served in the armed forces. 

What Sen. McCain doesn’t get is that once military personnel get out of the service and become veterans they are full fledged civilians. Educational benefits are not some budget based incentive to be dangled and withdrawn based on the budgetary needs of other parts of the U.S. government. It is a solemn promise, part of the whole VA motto “to care form him who shall have borne the battle…” motto, which has often literally been paid in blood. For Sen. McCain not to understand that is inexplicable and morally despicable.

If the Pentagon doesn’t have the money to pay recruiting bonuses perhaps it could try looking a little harder.  Cut a few billion out of Star Wars, get rid of the Future Combat System, and upgrade its auditing systems which are ranked as among the worst of all federal agencies. Ten billion here, ten billion there; pretty soon you are talking about enough money to fund Sen. Webb’s legislation for decades.

Plus, if anybody thinks that tying educational benefits to increased time in service is somehow going to encourage people to join, they’ve been smoking something far more potent than Bill Clinton ever inhaled.

Related posts:

1. Nothing is Too Good for Our Boys, Redux
2. PSA Welcomes its New Class of Congressional Fellows
3. Repeal the ban. Our soldiers’ lives are depending on it
4. Afghanistan: I don’t believe in miracles
5. Right vs. Right vs. Left vs. Left on Afghanistan