Quick Clips: Kids say the darndest things?

** Nevada’s chief executive, quite possibly the worst governor in the nation, Jim Gibbons, left his chief of staff Mike Dayton to field questions about educational funding from students representing the Clark County School District Student Advisory Council. The results weren’t pretty. Could a person venture that they might have been worse had the Governor himself faced the kids – and their grasp of the statistics and consequent implications? Full Story at Las Vegas Sun. Perhaps we could encourage the kids to ask the governor about northern Nevada’s bleak numbers in the last economic quarterly reports? [RGJ]

** Molly Ball reminds Nevada Republicans that if they lose one more seat in the State Assembly the Democrats will have a veto proof majority, and one more seat in the Senate will give Democrats control of the Legislature. [LVRJ]

** If this comment concerning the influence of lobbyists on John McCain’s president campaign isn’t replete with elitism, it’s hard to image what would qualify: “Asked today if questions about potential conflicts-of-interest might be affecting the choices of average American voters, Black responded bluntly: "Hell, no." He was careful to say that Senator McCain is committed to maintaining the integrity of the campaign -- hence his commitment to the re-vetting process. But, Black added, "I do not believe that average voters out there care." [MSNBC] The Great Unwashed, Hoi Polloi, Little People, have noticed that the campaign staffers weren’t vetted in the first place – had this not been the case “re-vetting” would not be necessary. What the “little people sitting out there in the dark” understand perfectly well is that executives who are tied to lobbyists (Jack Abramoff anyone?) have ethical conflicts of interest, and conflicts of interest all too often result in scandals, jail sentences, and other scenarios played out during the Bush Administration. Black’s had ties to the Mobutu regime in Zaire, Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos (on whom Reagan pulled the plug), Nigerian dictator Ibrahim Babangida, and the brutal regime controlling Equatorial Guinea. [HuffPo] What was McCain saying recently about not talking to brutal dictatorial regimes?

** We could do this for another hundred years? “The Army said today that it is "increasingly a challenge" to provide troops for the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and to reach its goal of allowing soldiers at least 12 months at home between combat tours. The experience of the 25th Infantry Division is typical. It just returned last October from a 15-month deployment in Iraq and will spend barely 12 months at home before its new deployment. The division served a 12-month deployment in Afghanistan in 2004 and 2005.” [Baltimore Sun] Or this? “The Pentagon plans to send 39,000 soldiers to Iraq to replace troops scheduled to leave the war zone and to hold the total U.S. force level steady over the next year.” [Reuters] When is a “Surge” a permanent escalation?

** Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) noted that President Bush would be the first chief executive to veto a benefits bill for veterans. [TP] Meanwhile, the Philadephia Inquirer, the Denver Post, and the Seattle News Tribune weigh in with support for the Webb Bill.

** Bomb Bomb Iran: Senator John McCain is upset that Senator Barack Obama is “downplaying” the danger from Iran [CNN] which, in turn, yields the question: Who wants the danger played UP? The list includes Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, and Norman Podhoretz [TWN] and where have we heard those names before? Neo-conservatives one and all. Ron Paul caught them at it in 2006. Conanson picked up on the implications of a McCain presidency in a Salon article last March, “The danger of a McCain presidency is not only that he would prolong our presence in Iraq but that he would seek to fulfill neoconservative dreams of a war expanded from Iraq into Iran and Syria, leading to a regional conflagration. With his campaign already sowing the arguments for a wider conflict, we will not be able to say we weren't warned.” For what it’s worth, McCain endorser Rev. John Hagee would be delighted to see the promotion of Armageddon. “Hagee, who has a radio and television ministry with a global reach and is the author of more than 20 books, views the Israel-Hezbollah conflict as a warm-up to a confrontation with Iran.“[RtWebWtch]

McCain proposes G.I. (i.e. Officers) Bill

Senator John Ensign (R-NV) said he was withholding judgment on the New G.I. Bill until he sees the final version, and Representative Dean Heller (R-NV2) was unsupportive in general. Now, they’ll have a bill they might be able to support, although that bill is far less than what the supporters of Senator Webb’s legislation are willing to offer veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. Senator John McCain and his sidekicks Senator Lindsey Graham and Senator Richard Burr have released their version of an improved G.I. Bill, calling for:

(1) An immediate increase in education benefits for active duty personnel to $1500 a month, and to improve retention, those benefits increase to $2000 a month after 12 or more years of service.

The Webb Bill: “Increased educational benefits would be available to all members of the military who have served on active duty since September 11, 2001, including activated reservists and National Guard. To qualify, veterans must have served at least three to thirty-six months of qualified active duty, beginning on or after September 11,2001.

The Webb bill provides for educational benefits to be paid in amounts linked to the amount of active duty served in the military after 9/11. Generally, veterans would receive some amount of assistance proportional to their service for 36 months, which equals four academic years. Veterans would still be eligible to receive any incentive-based supplemental educational assistance from their military branch for which they qualify.”

The remaining provisions are similar to the original Webb Bill except for the provisions highlighted in red.

(2) Significantly increased benefit for members of the National Guard and Reserves. Transferability, the ability of service members to transfer their education benefits to dependents. After 6 years, half of the benefit may be transferred and after 12 years 100% may be transferred to a spouse or dependent children.

(3) Student loan repayment. Allows servicemembers to use up to $6,000 per year of Montgomery G.I. Bill education benefits to repay Federal student loans. The Webb Bill would obviate the need for student loans in most cases.

(4) Creation of a matching program to help more veterans graduate debt-free. Up to an additional $3,000 per year could be paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs in return for the school retiring some or all of the servicemember’s debt. The Webb Bill would match the school dollar for dollar up to 50% of the tuition difference.

(5) Access to Montgomery G.I. Bill benefits for service academy graduates and Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps officers who continue serving.

(6) Builds on existing educational benefits program to ensure rapid implementation with minimal additional administrative costs.

To make a long story short: McCain’s version of a “New G.I. Bill” offers more to career officers and less to the ‘regular’ members of the Armed Forces. [Think Progress] “Webb spokeswoman Kimberly Hunter said that McCain’s bill is more focused on career officers, not the entire volunteer military force. She said that Webb’s benefit was designed for those in the military looking to transition to other careers. “This military does a fine job of managing its career force, but when comes to… the 70 to 75 percent of service members who volunteered and did their time and decided not to re-enlist, they’re being left behind and Sen. McCain’s legislation continues to do this,” Hunter said.” [The Hill] McCain’s bill is, then, a sop to a Department of Defense looking to improve retention and reward officers. Webb’s bill is much more like the G.I. Bill that assisted members of the U.S. forces during World War II make the transition to civilian life. Or, less charitably: Webb’s is a G.I. Bill – McCain’s is an Officer’s Bill.

We’ll have to wait to see if Senator Ensign and Representative Heller side with the G.I.’s or just the Officers?

Berkley supports New GI Bill, Ensign stalls, Heller opposes measure to support troops

Kudos to Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (D-NV1) for her support of the New G.I. Bill with its improved benefits for members of the American armed forces, especially in regard to educational benefits for members of the services and the National Guard. [LV Sun] Representative Jon Porter (R-NV3) signed on in support last week.

No applause from this corner for Senator John Ensign (R-NV) and Representative Dean Heller (R-NV2) who can’t quite make their enthusiasm for the occupation of Iraq match their interest in supporting the troops who are actually doing the work required during multiple deployments. Ensign can’t see his way clear to offer tuition, book stipends, and living allowances for Nevada veterans, saying that he’s waiting for the final version of the bill. This is an interesting stance for a legislator like Ensign who is a member of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. A person might think that a member of this committee could be engaged in shaping the contents of the bill rather than passively awaiting its final form. Indeed, one could argue that the purpose of serving on Senatorial committees would be to assist in the formulation of legislation that is of benefit to ones constituents. If this is the case, then Nevada’s junior senator is having none of it.

Ensign’s position is only slightly less disingenuous than Representative Heller’s. “Heller is not a supporter but his spokesman said the congressman is “constantly evaluating legislation that will help our country’s veterans.” The spokesman noted that Heller recently introduced legislation that would help Nevada’s rural vets who often travel far for medical care by giving them up to $400 in tax deductions for travel expenses if they live more than 25 miles from a Veterans’ Affairs medical facility. The bill has six sponsors.” [LV Sun] Leave it to Bush Parrot Heller to announce that his solution to any and all problems is a Tax Cut-Rebate-Credit. At $4.00 per gallon Heller’s beneficence has a short shelf life, and each mile driven presumably subtracts from the amount creditable for hotel and per diem expenses should those be necessary. Little wonder Heller’s legislation has attracted so few co-sponsors. Heller’s “constant evaluation of legislation that will help our country’s veterans” obviously doesn’t extend past supporting bills approved by the Bush Administration in advance.

One previously discussed shortcoming in educational benefits that Representative Berkley and others seek to address is summarized by the IAVA as follows: “In addition, structural problems and bureaucratic delays discourage veterans from using their GI Bill benefits. National Guardsmen and Reservists, including those who have served multiple combat tours, typically receive only a fraction of their GI Bill benefits. Moreover, 30% of troops who pay the nonrefundable $1,200 contribution do not end up using the GI Bill at all. These veterans have paid the government $230 million, but received nothing in return.” [IAVA] (emphasis added) Surely, Senator Ensign and Representative Heller aren’t in favor of having members of our Armed Forces pay for benefits they will never receive?

The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America have web information available on the New GI Bill, including a summary, a list of the 56 Senate and 217 House co-sponsors, and an action center. Congressman George Miller (D-CA) has a summary of specific provisions in the legislation, and Senators Webb and Hagel set forth their rationale for passing this important bill in an op-ed piece for the New York Times in November 2007.

Nevadans who are truly interested in supporting the troops beyond the purchase and display of bumper magnets may wish to contact Senator Ensign and Representative Heller to express their views concerning the fairness and the need for this important bill. However, one might doubt that Veterans’ Committee member Ensign will be much moved until he gets his marching orders from the White House, and one could conclude that Representative Heller will do as he did with the SCHIP legislation – make excuse after excuse to avoid supporting anything that his puppet masters in the Bush Administration haven’t approved. Nevada veterans deserve more.