The New GI Bill Makes Sense

After World War II, Congress passed what I consider to be one of the most important pieces of legislation in U.S. history, the GI Bill. The bill, which provided college benefits for troops returning from the war, quite literally built the American middle class. Today the GI Bill is still alive (though not so well). The legislation hasn’t been significantly modified or adjusted in years, failing to match the ever rising costs of state college tuitions and falling well short of the cost of most private institutions. And that’s to say nothing of the sky-high price of textbooks, increases in cost of living, health care, etc. Though Congress incrementally increases the monthly payout annually, the most a veteran can receive is a measly $1,100 dollars a month in tuition assistance. Fortunately, there’s been a growing movement in both Congress and the national media to completely overhaul the GI Bill. Senator Jim Webb (D, VA) has led the charge, and is currently enjoying bipartisan support for the initiative (though an early version failed to pass last year). Here are some of the specifics:

Under the updated bill introduced today, service members returning from Iraq or Afghanistan could earn up to 36 months of benefits, equivalent to four academic years. Covered benefits would include the established charges of their program, up to the cost of the most expensive in-state public school; a monthly stipend equivalent to housing costs in their area; and a small stipend per semester for books. In an effort to reduce the cost of private institutions, Senators Webb and Warner worked collaboratively to include incentives for private schools to further offset the tuition costs above what the benefit provides. A new program would be created in which the government will agree to match, dollar for dollar, any voluntary additional contributions to veterans from these institutions.

This makes an awful lot of sense. If we’re serious about initiatives to increase the size of the Army and Marines, and are equally serious about preserving the all-volunteer force, better incentives are needed to attract the right candidates for military service. The Pentagon is concerned that a plush benefits package will affect retention rates (the brass doesn’t want too many GIs leaving after their initial service commitment), but as noted ad nauseam here at THE WEEKLY STANDARD, the Pentagon needs to look inward on retention, not outward.

Related Content