Is it time for a new GI Bill?

caseycasey Posts: 10
edited November 2006 in A Moving Train
I thought this was pretty interesting, tell me what you think.

Nine words
Edward Humes - WorkingForChange.com

11.03.06 - When Ronald Reagan convinced the nation that the nine most dangerous words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help, the Gipper knew better, even if his audience didn't. Reagan was a member of the WW II generation and half his colleagues in Hollywood, from Newman to McQueen to Matthau, got their educations, training and first homes through the biggest of big government programs, the G.I. Bill.

Yet Reagan's 1980s laugh line has become 21st century conventional wisdom, justification for slashing and spurning every government cause that doesn't have pork on its label -- shortchanging even the veterans our current leadership claims to support.

Consider these two contrasting images to understand just how far we've sunk since June 1944, when Franklin Roosevelt signed the original G.I. Bill: After World War II, millions of veterans lined up for hours for a remarkable purpose: to register for free college educations, to buy homes with no money down and mortgages cheaper than rent, to sign up for vocational training and job counseling, and to apply for business and farm loans -- all courtesy of Uncle Sam and the original G.I. Bill. In the wake of the Iraq war and occupation, very different but no less remarkable lines now snake across many military bases nationwide: bread lines.

This is the dirty secret in a war filled with them: Thousands of military families have been left so desperate they must queue up for donations of surplus cheese, day-old bread and damaged boxes of frozen food. This is especially true for bases in areas with high costs of living, such as the Marines' Camp Pendleton near San Diego, where food lines have become a weekly fixture. When our warriors come home from Iraq, all too many find empty bank accounts, maxed-out credit cards and the realization that the college benefits used to entice enlistees won't cover the costs of a 4-year degree, nor support their families while they're in class. Still others, wounded in a war costing the country $10 million an hour, learn that their president and Congress have cut programs to heal their injuries, post-combat stress, and economic distress. "It is a scandal," says Paul Rieckhoff, director of the Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America. "You can be sent to Rikers Island (New York's jail), and you'll get better transitional assistance when you get released than you do getting out of the Marines."

Sadly, this is not merely a story of slighted veterans, but of America's dismal failure to invest in its future. Just imagine how a politician today would be pilloried if he proposed offering an entire generation free college, subsidized mortgages, job training and medical care. Why that would be a costly boondoggle, outright social engineering -- it would violate Reagan's dictum that government isn't the solution, it's the problem.

Today's unthinkable was yesterday's matter of course. In the midst of war, FDR and Congress overwhelmingly passed the bipartisan G.I. Bill to aid 16 million veterans -- 1 out of 8 Americans -- rebuild their lives. But this investment in America's future powered far more than a return to the status quo. It transformed the nation and the American Dream. It opened up the colleges (formerly elite bastions), raised suburbs out of bean fields (a nation of renters became a nation of homeowners), grew the middle class (from 1 in 10 before the war to 1 in 3 a decade after), and provided the medical, engineering and scientific prowess to conquer dread diseases, usher in the information age, and win the Cold War.

Such luminaries as Bob Dole, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, William Rehnquist, Warren Christopher, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, and George McGovern, among many others, got their starts through the G.I. Bill, as did 14 Nobel Prize winners, two dozen Pulitzer Prize winners, 238,000 teachers, 91,000 scientists, 67,000 doctors, 450,000 engineers and a million assorted lawyers, nurses, businessmen, artists, actors, writers and pilots. We seem to have forgotten that it was not unfettered free markets that transformed postwar America so much as a massive government program that intervened mightily in the housing, lending and education businesses, pushing (and subsidizing) them in ways they had long resisted -- spreading the wealth as never before. Or since.

Costly? Sure, but the G.I.Bill was truly a hand-up, not a hand-out. It more than paid for itself. A 1988 congressional study found that every dollar spent on education under the bill returned $7 through increased productivity, consumer spending and tax revenue. Fifty billion (in today's dollars) earned a $350 billion return. Unlike the $450 billion and counting being flushed down the Iraq drain, the G.I. Bill left us safer, stronger, more united, and more prosperous. That's called investing in the future -- not for the next quarter, but the next quarter century.

The original GI Bill had sweeping power because it touched a whole generation. Today's pale imitation reaches less than 1% of Americans. Decency and patriotism demand that it be strengthened, and our vets deserve every cent. But short of world war and a massive draft, it will never again be the same engine of opportunity. And America needs such an engine.

Before he died, FDR had a solution: national service. Young people would do good while earning education, medical, housing and pension benefits -- not just veterans, but everyone, a civilian GI Bill. Polls suggested a receptive public, but the idea died with Roosevelt. Bill Clinton tried a modest resurrection with his AmeriCorps project. Much more is needed.

In an era when college is a growing financial burden for families, when home ownership grows less affordable each day, when we are losing our competitive edge in advanced degrees, and when the American Dream so generously nurtured after World War II is under siege, it is time again to expect greatness from our government -- our common enterprise, our commonwealth. It is time to realize Reagan's old saw was not truism but self-fulfilling prophecy. Before he convinced us otherwise, our magnificent American government bested the Great Depression, created Social Security, won WW II, ended racial segregation, eradicated the scourges of polio and small pox, harnessed the atom, put a man on the moon, invented the internet, rebuilt war-ravaged Europe and Japan with the Marshall Plan, and raised America to new heights with the visionary G.I. Bill. Such is the legacy of greatness we inherited.

Now, for the first time in our history, polls show that Americans expect their children to inherit less prosperous lives than the current generation, a direct result of our embrace of those nine dangerous words. Is that really the legacy we want to leave behind?

http://www.workingforchange.com/printitem.cfm?itemid=21596
5/12/2006 Albany, NY
4/29/2003 Albany, NY
8/24/2000 Jones Beach, NY
9/13/1998 Hartford, CT
10/2/1996 Hartford, CT
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    casey wrote:
    Now, for the first time in our history, polls show that Americans expect their children to inherit less prosperous lives than the current generation, a direct result of our embrace of those nine dangerous words. Is that really the legacy we want to leave behind?
    Seeing as I don't tie being prosperous with being happy I don't really care if my son ends up being richer or poorer than me. When is enough prosperity enough? Have we looked at what the cost of our so called prosperity has been? Take a look at the environment, take a look at inner-cities, take a look at how many kids grow up in a single parent household. Take a look around the world at the poverty wrought at the expense of our prosperity. At a certain point the continual drive for more prosperity becomes greed.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • jeffbrjeffbr Posts: 7,177
    casey wrote:
    Now, for the first time in our history, polls show that Americans expect their children to inherit less prosperous lives than the current generation, a direct result of our embrace of those nine dangerous words. Is that really the legacy we want to leave behind?

    Those 9 words aren't dangerous. If the author, or anyone here, is relying on the government to create prosperity for their children, that reliance is misplaced. We need to get over the entitlement mentality and focus on self-reliance.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • EbizzieEbizzie Posts: 240
    jeffbr wrote:
    Those 9 words aren't dangerous. If the author, or anyone here, is relying on the government to create prosperity for their children, that reliance is misplaced. We need to get over the entitlement mentality and focus on self-reliance.


    Having served in the military myself, I promise you that these guys, especially those with families, are making dick for performing their duties. It's not a matter of entitlement, it's a matter of taking care of those who put on the uniform that many are too scared to put on.

    Apparently you missed the part where the monies put into these programs grew 700% when all was said and done. One thing to remember about many of these folks in uniform is that they are there because they want to find a better life. They may come from poverty or they may come from a middle class family, either way they are looking for a way to better their futures. This is the biggest difference between investing in veterans and investing in a welfare state. The welfare recipients are oftentimes not doing a fucking thing to better themselves. Getting a job at fucking McDonalds would be bettering themselves. You simply cannot discount the attitudes of those in the service. They have that essential human energy to succeed and improve that, as a government, you must feed.

    I assume that as a conservative you appreciate the benefits of lower taxes resulting in higher income tax receipts to the government. Monies left to the individual to invest will grow, whereas monies left with the government in the form of taxes do not. The same principle applies here. By reducing the federal budget in the form of veterans' benefits, the government is investing that money into an energized group of people. Those people will make that money grow for the government. Big difference between an investment and an entitlement, imo.
    "Worse than traitors in arms are the men who pretend loyalty to the flag, feast and fatten on the misfortunes of the nation while patriotic blood is crimsoning the plains." -- Abraham Lincoln
  • Look into the bill Virginia Foxx has passed.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
Sign In or Register to comment.