Those of us who served in Vietnam didn't get much of a Bill, either.

I went to college immediately following my arrival back in The World. I received no tuition help, and only $130.00 per month for living expenses, which were paid only during the school year, not during the summers.

That was it. Period.

In my life I have repeatedly been flabbergasted by the callousness we have shown to the people who have served in our wars.

Our leadership seems more intent on preserving the privilege of hedge fund operators to claim their ill-gotten gains as Capital Gains instead of simple income, than it is to fulfill promises made to those who risked their very lives for the nation.

My father was career Army, and fought in both Korea and Viet Nam. Back then, he was promised lots of things, most of which has now been whittled down to a minimum of benefits. He was lucky to have exhausted all of his post-secondary benefits before those were cut off.

I have no problem with controlled spending, but if you are going to ask the military to make a sacrifice, you (meaning Congress? President?) should make an equal sacrifice. Of course, I don't see too many folks in "public" office taking the high road when it comes to their own interests.

Providing a decent GI bill is the least we can do.

I'm sorry but the author is mistaken/misleading.
as per: HR 2642 CHAPTER 33--POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

(b) Covered Individuals- An individual described in this subsection is any individual as follows:

(1) An individual who-- (A) commencing on or after September 11, 2001, serves an aggregate of at least 36 months on active duty in the Armed Forces (including service on active duty in entry level and skill training); and (B) after completion of service described in subparagraph (A)--

(i) continues on active duty; or (ii) is discharged or released from active duty as described in subsection (c).

"commencing on or after September 11, 2001"

so yes, it does not apply in full to those who got out say approx. 2001-2003 but it is missleading, at the least, to say that "If a servicemember separated, retired or will separate or retire before August 01, 2009, their GI Bill is per usual (not Post-9/11)." Because, as the bill states, "commencing on or after September 11, 2001, serves an aggregate of at least 36 months on active duty" so if you served between sept.11 2001 and september 11, 2004 or beyond you are eligible for the new GI Bill.

Please do not misrepresent the new GI Bill. I agree it has it flaws, but we need to fix the actual flaws and not mislead veterans by giving out a bum scoop. It's hard enough to find out what benefits veterans are entitled to without the rumors and misinformation.

Sincerely,
Ernesto
1st Tanks USMC
Operation Endurring Freedom 2001-2002
Operation Iraqi Freedom 2003

I served from June 30, 2000, right after high school until June 29, 2004, including a tour to Iraq.
I was just 4 months shy of 36 months. What does this mean for me?
I went to college as soon as I finished my 4 yrs in the Army, from August 2004 until May 2008. I worked my way through school, because the GI bill only paid a fraction of what it actually cost.
I need to go back to school for my Masters in order to work in the industry I have studied for. Will the new post 9-11 GI Bill help me?

"It's hard enough to find out what benefits veterans are entitled to without the rumors and misinformation."

Actually, it's not. It's right here.

hey kathleen,

Length of Service Requirements and the Percentage of Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 36 months: 100% Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 30 continuous days on active duty and must be discharged due to service-connected disability: 100% Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 30 months, but less than 36 months: 90%Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 24 months, but less than 30 months: 80% Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 18 months, but less than 24 months: 70% Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 12 months, but less than 18 months: 60% Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 06 months, but less than 12 months: 50% Maximum Benefit Payable

At least 90 days, but less than 06 months: 40% Maximum Benefit Payable

Clavos,
" "It's hard enough to find out what benefits veterans are entitled to without the rumors and misinformation."

Actually, it's not. It's right here. "

[edited]

You are somewhat correct, vets should check out the VA's website for information. If only the author took the time to do the proper research.

-Ernesto

Dear Ernesto,

Feel free to contact me (by clicking on my name on the front page of the Culture section next to "Culture Editor") and I will be happy to relay the details given to me by phone and in person from the VA here in Southern California. Feel free to refute those details with said VA, but please do so while I'm standing in their office so as to accommodate my husband's ability, via my POA, to take advantage of these benefits.

I most certainly did my research and took the printed version of the bill with me and asked, "How does this apply to my husband?" I thought I knew and only sought to clarify, but was instead told numerous times, in numerous ways, that it did not apply to him - or many others in similar situations.

It is also worth noting that hundreds of thousands of military members, retirees and dependents who would otherwise qualify under the conditions of the bill but who will have already graduated by the time this bill takes effect - and there is no grandfather clause or retroactive reimbursement. That's the government's self-imposed discount, if ever there was one.

I would be happy to publish a revision, hell, even a retraction, if anyone (you?) can tell me how to get the VA to pay for my children's schooling by way of transferring my husband's benefit to them. Do note that in less than 60 days we will PCS overseas in the vicinity of MARFOREUR and the entire process will start again because, as you know, no one facility has the same answers as the next, regardless of the consistency they insist they share nor what is in print.

My husband has been screwed out of more benefits than you can shake a stick at for no other reason than timing or location. (Our children were overseas when they started college. Upon their return to the states, they were not allowed the in-state rate at any college in any state of the US because they were not considered a resident of any state - not even his home of record. Because he was stationed in a different state than the state where they came to finally attend, neither state would extend its "thank the military" paid-tuition program to our children.)

I know what the bill says. You know what the bill says. I also know -- and so should you -- how many people are not going to be able to take advantage of this benefit because of the 2,881-day delay that comes with no grandfather clause or reimbursement for those who would have otherwise qualified.

Sincerely, Diana

Diana,

Thank you for responding, I now better understand your underlying problem. Specifically, the transferability of benefits to your children and the fact that the new GI Bill is not retroactive. Which I agree are terrible flaws (as even I am not eligible for the new GI Bill since I've already exhausted my 36 months of the old GI bill benefits)

However, I think you must agree that writing this is misleading at best, "If a service member separated, retired or will separate or retire before August 01, 2009, their GI Bill is per usual (not Post-9/11)."

In addition, those in the VA offices are often mistaken in their interpretation of eligibility. I remember being told by a high level VA representative, in an effort to pat themselves on the back and pretend everything is going smoothly at VA, that all veterans are eligible for health benefits regardless of discharge, which is a complete falsehood.

I will be contacting you to help get this resolved, or at least get a real answer to your specific situation. In the meantime may I suggest contacting the Marine Corps Scholarship Foundation to see what educational assistance they may be able to provide for your children.

Remember, if that law say's your husband is eligible then he is and don't take No for an answer. Like with so many other benefits we still have to fight to get what we've earned.

Sincerely,
Ernesto

Dear Ernesto,

I appreciate your response, as well. I do hope those reading this thread continue to keep a watchful eye as often I've found the answers outside the system instead of inside where it should have been available (without a wrench and in the company of a large man of questionable reputation).

I look forward to your contact and will, as I said, definitely revise (or retract) and publish anything counter to that which I researched, found and published in this article.

Sincerely, Diana

Ernie1812,
Thank you for the information.

However, just to clarify: I got out of the service in 2004, I immediately went to school and used my full Montgomery GI Bill already. According to the new Bill I would be qualified to receive 90%.

My question is: Am I still entitled to the new 9-11 GI Bill or have I already used up my entitlement?
Thank you in advance.

Update: I found my answer I think in an article titled "Veterans Will See Big Benefits Increase In Just-Passed GI Bill":
Soldiers who fought in Iraq, Afghanistan will be eligible for nearly twice as much tuition as before.

By Gil Kaufman

According to this article: "Though veterans who have already used all their GI Bill benefits do not qualify, those who have not yet used them or have not previously signed up can take advantage of the benefits as long as they've served at least three years since September 11, 2001".

There is quite a bit of misinformation in the original opinion; not to mention her bitterness at the system allowing all those "undeserving" sailors, soldiers, airmen and marines that did not deploy to get the benefit.
It's a good start to a benefit needing much improvement.

Just got back from a VA meeting in Austin, if you served post 911 and have exhausted your benefits. you are still entitled to full 36 months BAH plus term payments if you served 3+ years active duty post 911.

If you ask me this post 911 should be retro'd back to post 1865 and the marines in the civil war...but that would bankrupt the govt..oh wait it is already bankrupt...print more green backs!!! hahahahh

Semper Gumby
"Always flexible"

From your article: "For hundreds of thousands of servicemembers who were on active duty during the 9/11 attacks and who then served in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Post-9/11 GI Bill does not apply."

You are incorrect. From the GI Bill website you even link to: "Veterans who have served at least 90 days of active duty service after September 10, 2001 and received an honorable discharge will qualify for the Post-9/11 GI Bill. To qualify for the full benefit a veteran must have served at least 3 years of active duty after September 10, 2001."

So, perhaps you should do better research.

"To qualify for the full benefit a veteran must have served at least 3 years of active duty after September 10, 2001"

servicemembers with many years already in but who retired before september 10, 2004 will not qualify and will not be grandfathered in...additionally, those who will qualify for this benefit but won't need it cannot transfer the benefit to their dependents...

NOT A TRUE STATEMENT: For hundreds of thousands of servicemembers who were on active duty during the 9/11 attacks and who then served in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Post-9/11 GI Bill does not apply.
FACT: I served from 1982 to 2005. I will receive this benefit 1 Aug 2009. 100%

DEFINATELY NOT A TRUE STATEMENT: By the time this bill takes effect, it will benefit more people who will have never deployed and who will never have never seen combat than it will those who have.
FACT: Where have you been?

AGAIN NOT A TRUE STATEMENT: Again, for hundreds of thousands of servicemembers who were on active duty during the 9/11 attacks and who then served in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Post-9/11 GI Bill does not apply.
FACT: I served from 1982 to 2005. I will receive this benefit 1 Aug 2009. 100%


As for my children they go to school for free in California.

Did this dumb bitch ever serve in the military or is she just another military wife that spreads her legs every opportunity (deployment) and then gets mad when she doesn't get something her own way? Just a question is all... (=

Can we all say 'misogyny'? I think we can...