Pelosi Shoots, Scores. No, Obey Blocks

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

GI Bill UPDATE: From someone who knows.

While it is true that the GI Bill expansion is a great idea, Senator Webb's bill ISN'T. Here's why: the benefits begin to kick in after- get this- 90 days. The Pentagon believes, and research confirms, that the retention effects of such a policy far outweigh the recruitment effects. In other words, your smartest, most motivated guys (who want to go to college) end up flushing the Army after one term of enlistment. The alternative bill, the McCain/Burr/Graham bill, has the max benefit kicking in after 6 years of service, largely dodging the negative hit on retention that the Webb bill has.

There is a real possibility that something like Webb (S22) would put a real strain on the all-volunteer force.

Just when I was about to give Nancy Pelosi some credit for recognizing their anti-victory stance wasn't helping the Democrats, along comes my state's David Obey to ensure the cause of  defeat stays in play.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Defying President Bush's demand to send him a clean war funding bill, House Democratic leaders unveiled legislation Tuesday that conditions the money on withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and adds billions of dollars in domestic spending. Democrats unveiled legislation Tuesday tying war funding to a timeline for troop withrawal.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wisconsin, outlined a $183.7 billion package that combines money for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the remainder of 2008 with additional funding requested by the administration to continue military operations through early 2009.

Democrats insisted that their bill stays roughly within the overall spending limit set by the White House, but they included two major domestic items -- unemployment assistance and a new GI Bill that expands college benefits for veterans -- that would cost about $12 billion.

While overall adding these domestic programs is BS, the GI Bill expansion is a great idea and W should make it clear that it is the only add on he will allow to remain. Pelosi wants to avoid reminding America just how many in her party don't consider victory important and in too many cases would actually prefer a defeat to hobble our imperialist desires.

This is a smart move politically as Americans have made it clear, while they would love to bring the troops home today, they don't want to do so short of victory. Nancy knows that the more of her team that agitates for immediate withdrawal, the tougher  it gets for the Messiah and all of her Blue Dog Dems. Even though her machinations would ensure the troops have the money they need, I don't want her to get away with back burnering her party's spineless position on Iraq and our greater counterinsurgency against jihadist Islam.

The big question is whether the anti-war crowd, which is deeply, religiously invested in withdrawal can put the chances of Barry O above their own simmering hatred. I kinda doubt it and can't wait for the Convention in Denver, Woo Hoo!

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2819/28850534

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Pelosi Shoots, Scores. No, Obey Blocks:

Comments

[Lands’nGrooves]

“While overall adding these domestic programs is BS, the GI Bill expansion is a great idea and W should make it clear that it is the only add on he will allow to remain.”

Well at first glance yes, but upon further review not so much –

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWQzOTZkZDE5ZDk0YzdiMWU2ZDZlZDhkOTJiOWFjZTA=

“Sen. Jim Webb’s proposed expansion of education benefits to veterans is a case in point. All Americans can agree that veterans should have more education benefits (the existing G.I. bill provides a significant range of benefits). But Webb’s bill, cosponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, would provide the full range of benefits after only three years, thus eliminating one of the most valuable incentives to troop retention.

Under current law, the full benefits vest only after six years, which means that soldiers who have served three years and are facing a second deployment — the most valuable soldiers in the military — have an incentive to stay through that deployment in order to get their college tuition fully covered, in most cases. The Webb-Hagel bill would eliminate this incentive, which is one reason Defense Secretary Robert Gates opposes it.”

And to be fair & balanced –

“As a check on this tactic (attaching unrelated domestic spending), President Bush has threatened to veto any bill that exceeds the amount he has requested. But Bush has undermined himself by asking for unrelated spending items of his own, including $770 million for international food aid. A better way to address soaring food prices would be to repeal the ethanol mandate, which has cut deeply into U.S. corn exports.”

[101st*Will]

Six years? Wow, I knew things had changed from the mid to late 70s when I was in but I had no idea. It used to really anger me when I would see some shitbird get out on a Chapter 5 General Discharge with less than a year in bragging that in a couple months they would be in college courtesy of Uncle Sam. Well I guess that’s not happening now. But six years? Man that’s pretty long.

[ooogaboooga]

hey I'm tired of pissing money down the toilet. Nice to see some fiscal responsibility for a change.

[JihadGene]

ooogiePISSYbooogie-
"Nice to see some fiscal responsibility for a change".

BWHAhahahahahahahahahahaha!
Holy DumbF*&K! Batman! OOgie, do you write speeches for Obama or sermons for Jeremiah Wright? You're a scream, Dude!!!!

[Scott]

101st*Will, six years to vest those kind of benefits isn't that bad. In law enforcement (which I retired from) the typical time to vest in pension benefits is between 8 and 10 years, some places 15 years. And the departments that offer educational benefits usually have a comittment time as well or you pay back the funds. Just thought I would throw you a civilian side comparison.

Stay safe!

[thebronze]

Personally, I hope Denver is a repeat of '68 Chicago.

[El Coqui]

Rove, you magnificent bastard!

[therapist1]

I love the idea for the expansion of the GI Bill. That should have been done years ago.

[Uncle Jimbo]

I am reliably informed that there are two GI Bill versions, the one I linked to is the less good one.

"While it is true that the GI Bill expansion is a great idea, Senator Webb's bill ISN'T. Here's why: the benefits begin to kick in after- get this- 90 days. The Pentagon believes, and research confirms, that the retention effects of such a policy far outweigh the recruitment effects. In other words, your smartest, most motivated guys (who want to go to college) end up flushing the Army after one term of enlistment. The alternative bill, the McCain/Burr/Graham bill, has the max benefit kicking in after 6 years of service, largely dodging the negative hit on retention that the Webb bill has.

There is a real possibility that something like Webb (S22) would put a real strain on the all-volunteer force."

Spinds fair to me.

Cordially,

Uncle J

[Tom W.]

"There is a real possibility that something like Webb (S22) would put a real strain on the all-volunteer force."

Which is why Webb wrote it.

He's a real piece of work, our Jimmy-boy. I still can't get over the fact that he wore his son's combat boots on the campaign trail. I've never seen a more nightmarishly cynical, exploitative stunt.

It literally made my skin crawl.

[Mr.Sparkle]

The GI bill is a great idea and I think they should enact a version in Britain.

[jordan]

McCain has said he wants a sliding scale that correlates time in service to benefits, and that Secdef supports his position, but the Webb/Dems have successfully implied he and Graham are opposed to expanding G.I. benefits.

On the funding bill, here's Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrill:

"The U.S. Army won't be able to pay salaries beyond June 15th unless Congress approves the $108 billion more for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or authorizes a fund transfer. If the supplemental spending legislation is not enacted by then, the Pentagon will be forced to seek Congressional authority to use money designated for other services to fund the Arny payroll." ( Bloomberg )

Pelosi is squeezed between the radical left that wants to starve the military of funds, and moderate Dems who don't want to risk the perception of hostility toward the troops when they're trying to make Obama their Commander-in-Chief. On and on and on they will go to hobble the war effort by keeping a large question mark over critical funding, and in this fragile and pivotal phase of the war, no less.

B5 had a video up a while back of Pelosi and Obey at a presser after 06 explaining their 60-90-180 day withdrawal plan, contradicting each other and giving a different number in every sentence. It would have been hilarious had it not been so serious.

They probably also are keeping in mind the DoD budget cuts Obama envisions, as he laid out in his video on cutting the military. (It's on Youtube as In 52 Secs Why Obama Will Never Win the General Election.)

It says he will not weaponize space, defund future combat systems, and cut wasteful spending in weapons programs, in addition to starting withdrawals within 180 days of taking office. I thought he was more of a centrist, but perhaps that's not where the voters are this year.

And Sparkle, now that you all have brought in a more conservative government, maybe you will get a G.I. bill.

[jordan]

P.S. the video above also mentions the Quaddrenial Defense Review and how he won't let it be used to justify unnecessary defense spending.

[Theresa, MSgt (ret), USAF]

Merida Initiative update: White House sneaks it into war spending bill

By Michelle Malkin • May 9, 2008 09:59 AM

President Bush on Wednesday showcased his request for $500 million in U.S. military assistance to help Mexico combat murderous drug cartels in a bid to build congressional support for the more contentious part of his spending package — the latest multibillion dollar request for emergency war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bush crafted plans for the U.S. military assistance to Mexico at a meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon 14 months ago and sketched details last October, including money for military equipment such as helicopters, training and assistance in combating corruption in the criminal justice system.

Bush pitched his financing plan to the Council of the Americas, an organization of international businesses that backs free trade and democracy. The U.S. military assistance — $500 for Mexico and $50 million for Central American nations — will help them “deal with the scourge of these unbelievably wealthy and unbelievably violent drug kingpins,” Bush told the organization’s conference at the State Department.

Administration officials have said the remaining $900 million originally proposed in the Merida Initiative will be requested later…
…Bush pivoted off the remarks at the Council of the Americas to appeal for favorable congressional action on his entire emergency spending request, not just the tiny share set aside for U.S. military assistance to Mexico and Central American nations.
The total for the supplemental spending package was in flux. The Bush administration sought at least $108 billion to finance operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through Sept. 30. The House Democratic leadership fashioned a spending package of nearly $195 billion that included domestic spending that Bush has threatened to veto.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill may get a more detailed look at the program’s spending blueprint today when the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s panel on Latin America hears testimony from the State Department’s top Latin America specialist, Thomas Shannon.

Adam Isacson of the Center for International Policy, a non-profit think tank that opposes the Merida Initiative, said the administration included financing for the program within the emergency war supplemental bill because it would be ”hard to strip out any part of that spending package.”
Details of the spending proposal were not made available by the White House.