McCain still MIA on Webb's GI Bill

[RunInRed 16,492]

(CNN) – Two presidential candidates were back on Capitol Hill Thursday, but the third was noticeably absent.

Presumptive Republican presidential candidate John McCain campaigned in California as his Senate colleagues voted to approve a measure that many Republicans and war veterans support – but he opposes.

The legislation, an updated version of the GI Bill, passed the Senate Thursday afternoon by a wide 75-22 vote margin and passed the House earlier this month by a similarly wide margin, proposes to essentially provide a full scholarship to in-state public universities for members of the military who have served for at least three years.

But McCain, as well as President Bush and much of the military brass, oppose the measure because they worry it will deplete retention rates among those currently serving in the military at a time when recruitment efforts are already struggling.

And in what is a sign of just how much of political issue this has become for the Arizona senator, his likely presidential rival Barack Obama took to the Senate floor earlier Thursday to directly chastise him for not supporting the measure.

The bill has already become a political football in the presidential race and poses a major dilemma for McCain: his experience as a post-Vietnam War military officer left him with firsthand experience of the effects of an understaffed military. But his current stand puts him in direct opposition of many veteran organizations whose support will be crucial to his White House hopes.

Democrats, including Obama, see the measure as an opportunity to undermine one of the Arizona senator's greatest strengths — his credibility on military matters and his broad support among military veterans.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

[Auburn85 432]

(CNN) – Two presidential candidates were back on Capitol Hill Thursday, but the third was noticeably absent.

Presumptive Republican presidential candidate John McCain campaigned in California as his Senate colleagues voted to approve a measure that many Republicans and war veterans support – but he opposes.

The legislation, an updated version of the GI Bill, passed the Senate Thursday afternoon by a wide 75-22 vote margin and passed the House earlier this month by a similarly wide margin, proposes to essentially provide a full scholarship to in-state public universities for members of the military who have served for at least three years.

But McCain, as well as President Bush and much of the military brass, oppose the measure because they worry it will deplete retention rates among those currently serving in the military at a time when recruitment efforts are already struggling.

And in what is a sign of just how much of political issue this has become for the Arizona senator, his likely presidential rival Barack Obama took to the Senate floor earlier Thursday to directly chastise him for not supporting the measure.

The bill has already become a political football in the presidential race and poses a major dilemma for McCain: his experience as a post-Vietnam War military officer left him with firsthand experience of the effects of an understaffed military. But his current stand puts him in direct opposition of many veteran organizations whose support will be crucial to his White House hopes.

Democrats, including Obama, see the measure as an opportunity to undermine one of the Arizona senator's greatest strengths — his credibility on military matters and his broad support among military veterans.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

this line could absolutely be taken the wrong way.

shows as if the priority has become to undermine McCain instead of focusing on the GI Bill. Why not just let the actions speak for themselves?

[RunInRed 16,492]

His first excuse was he didn't have time to read the bill. Now, 1.5 years later, it needs to be known that he just won't support it.

[OldNewby 27]

If McCain was not present, he could not vote present.

[CCTAU 3,350]

Cleverly crafted to look like it helps the military, when in fact, it would cause many to leave after only a few years. It should have been full scholarship while enlisted and normal GI bill after enlistment. Kudos to the dims. Well played.

[Auburn85 432]

But McCain, as well as President Bush and much of the military brass, oppose the measure because they worry it will deplete retention rates among those currently serving in the military at a time when recruitment efforts are already struggling.

anyone know who or what is being talked about with much of the military brass?

[otterinbham 0]

Well, while we're talking about support or lack of support for bills, why don't we talk about Obama's vote for the $300 billion Farm Bill that was recently passed, which is nothing more than a huge giveaway for agribusiness, which saw profits increase 57% last year? McCain voted against that, too.

Or, if you're fulminating against the cost of gas and food, how about Obama's support for the boneheaded Ethanol subsidies, a craven welfarism if ever I saw it. McCain voted against that, too.

In short, a better question to ask is this: Why are we applauding the senator from Illinois for heaping even more spending into the Federal budget? McCain is, in my book, far more consistent across the board in voting against programs that are popular in the short run, but damaging in the long run.

[Justin5 20]

Well, while we're talking about support or lack of support for bills, why don't we talk about Obama's vote for the $300 billion Farm Bill that was recently passed, which is nothing more than a huge giveaway for agribusiness, which saw profits increase 57% last year? McCain voted against that, too.

Or, if you're fulminating against the cost of gas and food, how about Obama's support for the boneheaded Ethanol subsidies, a craven welfarism if ever I saw it. McCain voted against that, too.

In short, a better question to ask is this: Why are we applauding the senator from Illinois for heaping even more spending into the Federal budget? McCain is, in my book, far more consistent across the board in voting against programs that are popular in the short run, but damaging in the long run.

Please see my response to this in the Farm Bill post.

[Auburn85 432]

Let me first admit, I would probably have commented on this article if Bush's name was remotely in the sentence with McCain, but how convenient that Bush is mentioned immediately after McCain's.

Afterall, Obama is especially vocal on McCain running for Bush's 3rd term.

and one more thing...

Barack Obama took to the Senate floor earlier Thursday to directly chastise him for not supporting the measure.

why not use the word attack?

[otterinbham 0]

Well, while we're talking about support or lack of support for bills, why don't we talk about Obama's vote for the $300 billion Farm Bill that was recently passed, which is nothing more than a huge giveaway for agribusiness, which saw profits increase 57% last year? McCain voted against that, too.

Or, if you're fulminating against the cost of gas and food, how about Obama's support for the boneheaded Ethanol subsidies, a craven welfarism if ever I saw it. McCain voted against that, too.

In short, a better question to ask is this: Why are we applauding the senator from Illinois for heaping even more spending into the Federal budget? McCain is, in my book, far more consistent across the board in voting against programs that are popular in the short run, but damaging in the long run.

Please see my response to this in the Farm Bill post.

And see my response to your response. The Farm Bill is so big a sham, it has been roundly denounced by the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal alike--quite an accomplishment.

[arnaldoabru 11]

I'm glad McCain supports out troops.

[RunInRed 16,492]

So here are veterans that stood up for us...and now we have politicians who won't stand up for them? Here's what I don't get about JM's argument:

He claims it will hurt retention...so let's not give them the benefits they deserve because it might not keep them long enough in "the system".... seriously Come on JM, support the bill and support our troops - put your vote where your mouth is. Even you know it's the right thing to do.

[arnaldoabru 11]

Didn't McCain go to a 25,000.00 a plate fund raiser, rather than show up to vote one way or the other.

[Auburn85 432]

this was all in the GI bill vote?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/2...s-iraq-funding/

WASHINGTON — In a stunning vote that illustrated President Bush's diminished standing, the Senate on Thursday ignored his veto threat and added tens of billions of dollars for veterans and the unemployed to his Iraq war spending bill.

A majority of Republicans broke ranks with Bush on a veto-proof 75-22 vote while adding more than $10 billion for various other domestic programs, including heating subsidies for the poor, wildfire fighting, road and bridge repair, and health research.

Democrats crowed about their victory. But the developments meant more confusion about when the must-pass measure might actually become law and what the final version will contain.

Senators voted 70-26 to approve $165 billion to fulfill Bush's request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan into next spring, when Bush's successor will set war policy. Overall, the measure contains $212 billion over the coming two years _ $28 billion more than the administration sought _ plus about $50 billion more through 2017 for veterans' education benefits.

Bush has promised to veto the Iraq spending if it exceeds his request. He has enough GOP support in the House to sustain a veto.

But the spectacle of 25 Senate Republicans abandoning the White House and voting to extend jobless benefits by 13 weeks and boost the GI Bill to provide veterans enough money to pay for a four-year education at a public institution made it plain that Bush's influence is waning.

"He has no political capital left," said Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah.

"What influence?" said a triumphant Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader. Reid had been skeptical of adding dozens of items favored by the free-spending Appropriations Committee to Bush's war request.

But the committee's plan contained so many smaller items favored by senators in both parties _ including money for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, NASA, and additional food and drug safety inspectors _ that even GOP conservatives such as Sens. Larry Craig and Mike Crapo of Idaho rebuffed the White House. The duo were strong supporters of $400 million to subsidize schools in rural counties hit hard by declines in timber revenues.

The bill also contained $490 million for grants to local police departments, $451 million to repair roads damaged by natural disasters, $200 million for the space shuttle program, and $400 million for National Institutes of Health research projects.

The Senate action sent the bill back to the House, which last week endorsed the help for veterans and the unemployed, but kept its version clean of most other domestic programs. The House also included a one-half of a percentage point income tax surcharge on wealthier people to pay for the expanded GI bill.

The House also failed to approve the war money in a vote last week. Republicans unhappy with the Democrats' add-ons joined with anti-war lawmakers to defeat it.

Because of the differences between the two versions, it will take weeks to pass a final compromise, which Bush is expected to veto, and then send him one he can sign.

Time is slipping, though Defense Secretary Robert Gates testified Wednesday that the Pentagon can scrape by until late July by shifting funds from other accounts to finance operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

First, however, lawmakers left Washington for a weeklong Memorial Day recess.

A popular plan in both the House and Senate bills would block new Bush administration rules that would cut spending on Medicaid health care for the poor and disabled by $13 billion over the next five years. Governors in both parties pressed for the relief.

The White House had braced for defeat even as Democrats initially expressed skepticism they would prevail. Yet the magnitude of the defeat was startling.

"Our troops deserve better than having essential war time resources held hostage to billions in unrelated spending," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. "Congress should pass a clean war funding bill when they return from Memorial Day recess."

Still, it seems clear that Bush will have to accept some Democratic additions.

"When it comes to Iraq, it appears that money is no object for President Bush," said the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. "Yet when it comes to important priorities here at home, he turns into Ebeneezer Scrooge."

Domestic programs included $8.2 billion for Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters, with $5.8 billion for levees around New Orleans and $348 million for restoration of Mississippi coastal islands.

There is $850 million for international food aid, $1.9 billion for military construction projects, and several billion dollars in various foreign aid programs _ all requested by the administration.

In a 63-34 vote, the Senate rejected Democratic efforts to urge Bush to begin redeployment of combat troops and place other limits on his ability to conduct the war in Iraq.

The House was on track to pass a bill authorizing $601.4 billion in defense spending for next year and raise troop pay by 3.9 percent. The legislation would trim money for missile defense and some modernization projects, while boosting spending on heavily armored vehicles.

The White House has threatened to veto the bill because of several provisions, including the more than $700 billion shaved from missile defense efforts.

Meanwhile, the House passed a bill authorizing $601.4 billion in defense spending for next year and raising troop pay by 3.9 percent. The legislation would trim money for missile defense and some modernization projects while boosting spending on heavily armored vehicles. Prior to the 384-23 vote, the House approved two Democratic amendments that would prohibit the military from using contractors to interrogate detainees and require interrogations be videotaped.

The White House has already threatened to veto the bill because of several other provisions, including the more than $700 billion shaved from missile defense efforts.

[Tiger Al 0]

No, Auburn85.

In a stunning vote that illustrated President Bush's diminished standing, the Senate on Thursday ignored his veto threat and added tens of billions of dollars for veterans and the unemployed to his Iraq war spending bill.

[Tigermike 3,055]

No, Auburn85.

In a stunning vote that illustrated President Bush's diminished standing, the Senate on Thursday ignored his veto threat and added tens of billions of dollars for veterans and the unemployed to his Iraq war spending bill.

Don't be so selective Al.

But the committee's plan contained so many smaller items favored by senators in both parties _ including money for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, NASA, and additional food and drug safety inspectors _ that even GOP conservatives such as Sens. Larry Craig and Mike Crapo of Idaho rebuffed the White House. The duo were strong supporters of $400 million to subsidize schools in rural counties hit hard by declines in timber revenues.

The bill also contained $490 million for grants to local police departments, $451 million to repair roads damaged by natural disasters, $200 million for the space shuttle program, and $400 million for National Institutes of Health research projects.

The Senate action sent the bill back to the House, which last week endorsed the help for veterans and the unemployed, but kept its version clean of most other domestic programs. The House also included a one-half of a percentage point income tax surcharge on wealthier people to pay for the expanded GI bill.

"Our troops deserve better than having essential war time resources held hostage to billions in unrelated spending," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. "Congress should pass a clean war funding bill when they return from Memorial Day recess."

The White House has threatened to veto the bill because of several provisions, including the more than $700 billion shaved from missile defense efforts.

Why won't the dims send a clean bill? Well in order to do that it would require them to not include pork projects for the home districts. Which they have gone to for the Memorial Day week end to tell how great the projects will be.