Military News - Military Times

Senate battles over GI Bill improvements

The Senate fought an unexpected skirmish over GI Bill benefits Wednesday when Republicans tried to attach a Pentagon-backed plan that includes the right to transfer benefits to family members onto a law enforcement labor practice bill.

By a 56-42 vote, the effort failed — but not before creating ill will among lawmakers and making it increasingly unlikely that wide bipartisan support will be achieved to improve the GI Bill.

One day before the House of Representatives is expected to endorse the idea of folding the 21st Century GI Bill of Rights into the 2008 wartime supplemental funding bill, Senate Republicans sought to steal some of the thunder by trying to get their alternative plan attached to HR 980, the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.

Republicans outmaneuvered Democrats, not only offering the amendment but also preventing their proposal from being changed further — so that Democrats were forced, in the end, to vote against GI Bill increases.

That vote came on a motion to set aside the Republican plan.

Democrats had planned to offer their GI Bill proposal, the 21st Century GI Bill of Rights, as an amendment to the 2008 wartime supplemental funding bill that House and Senate leaders want to pass by Memorial Day.

Putting the improved veterans’ benefits — full tuition to public colleges, plus a stipend — into the supplemental funding bill was seen by Democratic leaders as a way to avoid problems in trying to pay for the benefits and to get more votes for war funding.

The House is scheduled to vote on the supplemental tomorrow, at the same time the Senate Appropriations Committee begins writing its version of the bill.

Democrats, caught by surprise by the Republican maneuver, were angry. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., a member of the Senate leadership who serves on the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, called the maneuver a “slap in the face” to veterans.

“This Republican attempt to hijack benefits for our veterans and first responders is simply one of the lowest moves I’ve seen in my time in the Senate,” Murray said. “Unfortunately, a small minority has put politics ahead of the needs of our veterans.”

Senate Democratic leader Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada called the action “untoward.”

Both the Democratic and Republican proposals would improve veterans’ education benefits, but differ markedly in their approaches.

The Democratic bill, sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., promises basic benefits that would match full tuition and fees at the most expensive four-year public school in the veteran’s state, plus a monthly living allowance based on military housing allowance rates for a married E-5, and a $1,000 annual stipend for books and supplies.

It also would drop the $1,200 enrollment fee and extend benefits to all service members who have three months or more of cumulative active service since Sept. 11, 2001.

The Republican bill, sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John McCain of Arizona and Richard Burr of North Carolina, would provide basic benefits of $1,500 a month, but service members who stay in the military for 12 years or longer could receive $2,000 a month.

The increase to $2,000 would be phased in, an effort to get at least three more years of service from anyone who wants more money. Monthly benefits for those with 12 or more years of service would be $1,650 in 2009, $1,800 in 2010 and $2,000 in 2011.

The plan does not include a monthly stipend, but it has other features. Veterans can use up to $6,000 in GI Bill benefits each year to repay federal student loans, and those who have served six years or more could to transfer some of their GI bill benefits to a spouse or children.

After six years of service, up to half of the benefits could be shared with the family. After 12 years of service, 100 percent of benefits could be shared.

Webb, whose bill has the support of 57 senators, including 14 Republicans, and two-thirds of the House of Representatives, accused Graham of a “bad faith” gesture, particularly because he had been talking with Graham about having their staffs meet to work out differences.

“I deeply regret the introduction of this amendment to the public safety employees’ bill,” Webb said in a statement. “I believe such a gesture wrongly politicizes efforts that we have been pursuing with respect to both the public safety employees and the veterans who have served us honorably since 9/11.”