Opinion

  Opinion  

BOB HERBERT: EXPANDING THE GI BILL SHOULD BE NO-BRAINER

At the top of the list of no-brainers in Washington, D.C., should be the proposal by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., to expand education benefits for the men and women who have served in the armed forces since Sept. 11, 2001.

It's awfully hard to make the case that these young people who have sacrificed so much don't deserve a shot at a better future once their wartime service has ended.

Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are on board. Who wouldn't support an effort to pay for college for GIs who have willingly suited up and put their lives on the line, who in many cases have served multiple tours in combat zones and in some cases have been wounded?

Well, you might be surprised. The Bush administration opposes it, and so does GOP presidential nominee John McCain.

Reinvigorating the GI Bill is one of the best things this nation could do. The original GI Bill of Rights, signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1944, paid the full load of a returning veteran's education at a college or technical school and provided a monthly stipend. Millions of veterans benefited, and they helped transform the nation.

"These veterans were able to get a first-class future," Webb told me in an interview. "But not only that. For every dollar that was spent on the World War II GI Bill, $7 came back in the form of tax remunerations from those who received benefits."

The benefits have not kept pace over the decades with the real costs of attending college. Moreover, service members have to make an out-of-pocket contribution -- something more than $100 a month during their first year of service -- to qualify for the watered-down benefits.

The Bush administration opposes the new GI Bill primarily on the grounds that it is too generous, would be difficult to administer and would adversely affect retention.

This is bogus. The estimated $2.5 billion to $4 billion annual cost of the Webb proposal is dwarfed by the hundreds of billions being spent on the wars we're asking service members to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. What's important to keep in mind is that the money is an investment, in both the lives of the veterans themselves and the future of the nation.

The notion that expanding educational benefits will have a negative effect on retention seems silly. The Webb bill would cover tuition at a rate comparable to the highest tuition at a state school in the state in which the veteran would be enrolled. That kind of solid benefit would draw talented individuals into the military in large numbers.

Webb, a former secretary of the Navy who specialized in manpower issues, said he has seen no evidence that GIs would opt out of the service in significantly higher numbers because of such benefits.

McCain's office said on Monday that it was following the Pentagon's lead on this matter, getting guidance from Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Under pressure because of his unwillingness to support Webb's effort, McCain last week introduced legislation, with substantially fewer co-sponsors, that expands some educational benefits for GIs, but far less robustly than Webb's bill.

Politicians tend to talk very, very big about supporting our men and women in uniform. But time and again we find that talk to be very, very cheap.

Bob Herbert is a columnist with the New York Times News Service.