Tell McCain To Step Up on G.I. Bill

Posted April 3, 2008 | 12:07 PM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Robert Lopez served 8 years in our military, fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as a tank commander. He was told he'd get his whole education bill paid for when he got out of the service. Mr. Lopez has fought and sacrificed for our country but like so many others, Mr. Lopez has faced the bleak reality of a government that has turned its back on its veterans.

That is why Senators Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel proposed a new GI Bill, which would bring back WWII-style standards of providing vets with full tuition, room and board. And that is why 51 senators have signed on, including 9 Republicans like John Warner, giving this GI Bill tremendous bi-partisan support.

But it isn't enough. Faced with unprecedented filibusters, the only way to ensure Senate passage of the GI Bill is to get 60 cosponsors. So far, John McCain has refused. The same McCain who insists he supports our troops. The same McCain who is voting lockstep with the Bush administration (who have also resisted this bill). We need to get John McCain to do the right thing. We need him to sign now and signal to other Republican leaders that we should be strongly behind our vets.

The original GI Bill transformed American history, providing education for returning soldiers. Not only was this our nation's moral duty for the unbelievable sacrifices of our World War II veterans, it helped create America's middle class and spurred decades of economic growth for our country.

That's why, today, we're launching this new web video with an accompanying petition, urging Senator McCain to step up and be a leader for veterans, by signing onto the GI Bill.

The burden of ensuring that our veterans get the education they were promised and earned largely sits on his shoulders. If he won't stand up for the troops, he must explain why.

Vote Vets, WesPAC and Brave New Films feel passionately about giving our veterans the support they rightly deserve. Our government owes our troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan the opportunity to receive full educational benefits. These patriots have fought hard for our government; it's time our government started fighting hard for them.

Sign the petition to McCain here.



Comments
126
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)

We have to continue to make this issue visible. We cannot let this slip into the oblivion of political media. John and many other senators are going to stonewall this until it no longer becomes possible for them to do so... we have to keep the pressure on.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:26 AM on 04/07/2008

Jon:
I spoke to a Mc Cain rep from his DC office on Friday. I called and left a message (my cell is a 602) and he called me back.

The 'kid' was very upset about the amount of calls he was getting. He made reference to the "Huffington Post" article.

He told me that McCain's office has been meeting w/ several veterans groups because there 'are so many problems with the bill'. He went through a list of problems such as, in AZ they get excellent benefits and would this be included or a choice. Also there is a period between (I think he said) from 86 to 92 where in your bill, those vets would be left out. Also wanted to make sure that the Guard and Reserves got the same benefits. He said that they wanted to make sure the bill was a top notch bill before Senator McCain signed on.

Now, as my name indicates, I hear more excuses than a Plt Sgt. So to me, all his reasons were BS.
I am sure he had them all written down and was reading. I speak to Mc Cain's office at least once a week and this is the first time I heard such aggrevation in an office person's voice.

Thank you for your email to me regarding this subject. I also forwarded on to Veterans for Peace.
Semper Fi!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 PM on 04/06/2008

Conservative Republican leaders and their like minded associates don't want a strong middle class. A strong middle class threatens their hold on power. Education raises people up the rungs of the socioeconomic ladder, not only raising their quality of life but strengthening their collective will for progressive political change.

Educated progressives are capable of determining the direction we want our country to go. Undereducated conservatives are willing to let their politically like-minded leaders determine overall public policy, based on a narrow set of "family" values. The undereducated conservative masses think these narrow social values guarantee moral and ethical value in determining conservative public policy.

The last seven and a half years of this administration should be enough evidence to prove to most educated voters that the Republican Party is responsible for record transfer of wealth to the top 1% of our citizenry. It's easy to understand that the average undereducated voter has the chance of aligning their political leanings to conservative talking points. Republican leaders understand that perception trumps reality with a large segment of the undereducated voter class.

A more difficult phenomenon to understand is the educated conservative. It's no wonder that psychologists consider that educated conservatives suffer from mental disorder. When the country prospers as a whole, rich conservatives get even richer. The reason educated conservatives don't want a strong middle class is because they tend to vote progressive. Educated conservatives are willing to exploit the "have nots" in order to retain power and influence.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 04/10/2008

"The same McCain who insists he supports our troops."

How about the same McCain who has son who served and will serve again in Iraq. How about the same McCain who has another son entering military? How about the same McCain who is the only candidate who served this country and whose children go to the army rather than hedge fund?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:54 PM on 04/06/2008

The same McCain who wants to keep our soldiers in Iraq indefinitely in peace time or crisis time yet wanted to bomb Iran without considering the consequences of the nuclear fallout our soldiers will be exposed to if they remain in Iraq during this process? Iran's nuclear sites get bombed, Chernobyl-like situation, our soldiers next door receiving massive fallout with every passing breeze.

McCain is a hazard to this nation, and particularly to our soldiers. His rhetoric means nothing to soldiers on the ground. They know better. There is not a single excuse or fiscal consideration worthy of his denial of this bill. What a morale booster he's already showing himself to be.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 PM on 04/06/2008

As a Viet Nam veteran I was able to receive a college education with the much needed assistance of the G. I. Bill; todays soldier should receive that and more; no questions, no conditions.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:46 PM on 04/06/2008
Moderator's Pick

HuffPost's Pick

All you so-called republicans should be ashamed of yourself for coming out in opposition to this bill. Listen, I am a soldier who has been in this war.. and for someone to try and equate this bill with typical overspending by "liberals" is an outrage and for your information the veterans of this country are not going to sit back and let you high-jack this process any longer. We are pissed off and paying attention. You can say what you want, but we are not going away and we are not going to let you use our country and our countries military for your own political and financial gains. This bill would help military personnel..PERIOD.... and if you do not want to support it, fine.... but you will be held accountable for your decision and it will be made clear that you do not support our military. You are not going to wiggle out of that....whether you are John McCain, or just someone who feels compelled to post on these blogs about how this bill is such a bad thing for our country and our military.... your time is up.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:55 AM on 04/06/2008

Well said buddy. Keep up the fight!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 PM on 04/06/2008

As much as I hate goverment spending more and more money, I have to agree. We owe those who chose to serve this country. Helping them with education is the BEST way to help them. In long run, it will not cost much - educated people earn more and pay moe in taxes. At the end of the day we all will be better of.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:06 PM on 04/06/2008

The bill needs 60 sponsors, they say...and their article is designed to lead lots of ignoramuses, of whom there's a large population here, to believe that McCain is the only one who hasn't supported it. Let's find out what's wrong or inadequate about the bill before we follow these pied pipers around. Anyway, this is premature. Either Jeremiah Wright's protege Obama or Bill Clinton's wife Hillary is going to need lots of this sort of tendentious verbal horsemanure later in the year.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:34 AM on 04/06/2008

Way to go Hillbilly, recognizing this is just another typical democrat hit piece and pointing out where. But let me go further........the article extolls the GI Bill's virtues (rightly so, and I'm one benefitting from it) of the past and then condemns Senator McCain for not supporting a new version. But without, as you noted, explaining why Mc is against. Amazingly, the article's distinguished writers claim that the added support of nine republican senators is "tremendous bi partisan support." Uh, excuse me, a little twisting of Republican support percentage going on here?
Senator John McCain is the Republican Party's nominee for POTUS. While the two leading Democrat Party's candidates continue to thrash one another Senator McCain will not escape the thrashing, in effect, suffering the death of a thousand cuts from those on the left who are uniquely qualified (militarily) to know better.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:48 AM on 04/06/2008

I have a couple of questions for Mr. McCain. I didn't have to go to Nam, but I was in their little lottery, and I remember seeing the POW's coming home, they had been through a horrible ordeal, many died of malnutrition and all of them were emaciated, Mr. McCain doesn't appear to be. Why is that? Also, I know that when the Viet Cong found out his father was an Admiral, they offered to release him and he declined, a decision I have never understood. Why would a person voluntarily subject themselves to such treatment? A caller on C-SPAN this morning, a Disabled Viet Nam vet, hinted at these questions, and I think he deserves an answer! As that vet said, whatever the answers are McCain should not be blamed for anything under these circumstances, but if he is going to play that tape in his ads, he should be prepared to answer the questions it may bring up!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:24 AM on 04/04/2008

The article did not state if Barack Hussein Obama or Hillary Clinton supported the bill.
Wesley Clark and Jon Soltz are two of the the biggest oppurtunists this country has seen in decades. Nothing but manipulative liars. Too bad their parents failed.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:51 AM on 04/04/2008

McCain's education was publicly funded at Annapolis and throughout his life for that matter. McCain didn't get into Annapolis by merit but by political contacts of his Admiral father and grandfather. It's true Republicanism "I got mine, screw you". Furthermore McCain has a 20% , out of a 100%, favorable rating for funding the Veterans Administration. Hillary for example has an 80% favorable voting record. This information is a matter of Congressional record. McCain who has already declared wars for 100's of years, yet doesn't support Veterans or the troops he intends to use for his endless war plans.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 AM on 04/04/2008

Can you prove that McCain got into Annapolis on political clout? Or are you merely, hysterically, overstating the obvious... He earned his way in, through either an appointment, or through his fathers exemplary service, which is the only way all midshipmen get in?!?
Semper fi

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:26 AM on 04/06/2008

Yes, typical Republican political debate: unsubstantiated name-calling. When did YOU serve?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:12 AM on 04/04/2008

Yes, Clinton and Obama are both sponsors of the bill. For more information, check out www.congress.org. The legislation ID's are S.22 in the Senate and H.R.2702 in the House.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:12 AM on 04/04/2008

Next time a Repub says they support the troops, say "Yes, 9 of them do, the other 40 don't."

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:19 AM on 04/04/2008

The GI Bill is a moral imperative. McCain is a traiter by not supporting better salary, benefits, medical support, proper equipment and the WWII GI Benefits. I've heard an argument which states "we can't improve their education and GI Bill benefits it will incent them to leave"; I say you must put the GI Bill back in order to retain our soldiers. They leave because they go through tour rotation after tour rotation like Russian roullette and when they are injured and disabled they've been discarded. The shame of this is on the Bush Administration. McCain should get on board, especially with body armour and proper clothing.
Because the PX ran out of boots and didn't expect my son's size in for a while, I purchased boots for him and immediately shipped them out. The Commanding Officer would not let him wear the "non-approved" boots he had (same color) because that brand wasn't approved by the CO. Yet my son was forced to wear another soldier's boots a size too big until my shipment arrived. Go figure.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:40 AM on 04/04/2008

McCain also a traitor for violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice and a war criminal for bombing Vietnamese civilians as well as a coward for not protecting his family from the insults and abuses of the Bush gang in 2000. Moral imperative rings hollow with a war criminal, traitor and coward like McCain.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 AM on 04/04/2008

I've seen this argument before, but have seen no substantiation or justification for the arguments. In order for either of those to be true, or to be proven true, evidence is needed. Do you have that evidence? Who has the evidence. Do you know his ROE at the time? Were his targets within civilian areas, a crime in itself, since it subjects the civilians to justifiable hazard?
Semper fi

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:29 AM on 04/06/2008

That is the kind of insanity that has been part a horrible burden we have put on our brave soldiers. We should be offering ever soldier around the world the best because they deserve it more than ever. A larger percentage of troops have spent more time in combat zones than in any time in our history.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:29 AM on 04/04/2008

It is a VOLUNTEER military.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:52 AM on 04/04/2008

yes people must volunteer to sign up, but many do that because they feel they have no other choice, no other prospects for getting out of a life of poverty. when i joined it was peace time. i volunteered for college money, a chance to travel and job training, NOT WAR.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:53 AM on 04/06/2008

Your contribution here is understandable as it is alike many others' reason for joining. So what do you think you'd do if shot at, or diving into a bunker undergoing mortar fire? I suspect you'd do the same as most and pull together for each other...........that's how it works.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:59 AM on 04/06/2008


Because of your republican credentials I am curious as to what the current Republican position is with regard to salary, benefits, health and welfare for our boots on the ground?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:57 PM on 04/04/2008

The Stop Loss Program negates this argument! It may not be a Draft, but it IS COMPULSORY SERVICE!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:31 AM on 04/04/2008

Volunteer to be death-slaves, or, to sincerely believe they are protecting their beloved nation?

How can there be a "moral imperative" brought ot those who do have the scruples to do the right thing to begin with. If we can't honestly get what we want (and righteously deserve) in government -- it's time to figure out how to make the change to more a democratic, cheater-proof approach.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:30 AM on 04/04/2008
Moderator's Pick

HuffPost's Pick

How can there be a "moral imperative" brought to those who do NOT have the scruples to do the right thing to begin with.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:31 AM on 04/04/2008

Your point? Volunteers don't deserve our respect? You and Cheney must be chuckling together over the fact that some fools actually volunteered to serve their country.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:15 AM on 04/04/2008

I sure am sorry if he got sold a bill of goods! Shame on him for not asking any questions of his recruiters. My son leaves in 5 days for Navy Boot Camp. We've known from the first that the Navy will give him $36k for education, increasing to $50+ if he makes a pretty small contribution from pay (sorry, I don't remember the exact numbers). While I might otherwise agree with the authors' assertions, anything with Clark's name on it is automatically suspect to me. I sure would like to see the details of the bill! I'm betting the "D" side of the aisle inserted some pretty poor language, that would ultimately hurt our vets and our active-duty GI's.
Semper fi

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 PM on 04/03/2008

As a Navy vet I can tell you that without a doubt both you and your son have been sold a bill of goods. No matter what promises were made, the Navy's escape clause is a little something called "The Needs of the Service," which trumps all. Good luck on collecting on anything the Navy promised. And I mean that sincerely.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:40 PM on 04/04/2008

Sorry, I'm a long time Marine vet. The money is there, so you either didn't look for it, or you are lying. I got the GI Bill money that existed when I retired, 12 years ago. This is a better program, and is in writing.
Semper fi

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:31 AM on 04/06/2008

unless everything is in writing there is no guarantee on anything a recruiter tells you. and even then they can sometimes get around it.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 AM on 04/06/2008

Well, the GI bill as it is currently written is what you are probably talking about, and it requires making a pretty small contribution from pay to even get the $36K.
If you pay $100 per month for 12 months, you qualify for the GI bill. If you pay additional funds (up to an additional $600) for each $4 you pay, you will receive an extra $1 per month while in college for living expenses. It is a great deal, but most folks either don't use it, or don't fully use it, as good as the deal is, very little funding is required by the DOD.
I hope you go back to the paperwork, because if your son doesn't make the initial $1200 in payments by the deadline, he will NEVER qualify for the GI bill and he won't get $36K for education.
Not sure where you got the $36 K though, you get about $1000 in living stipend a month for 48 months, plus tuition and books within certain limits. Should be far more than $36K. Maybe you meant $63K???

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 AM on 04/04/2008

You are absolutely right. He has already gotten this info, and I'll be holding his feet to the fire to ensure he gets the full available amount.
Semper fi

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:34 AM on 04/06/2008

The military fine print is notorious. Better check the education benefits closely and all the exceptions to when they can and cannot be used.