Del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Reddit
Newsvine
co.mments
Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008
To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a program of educational assistance for members of the Armed Forces who serve in the Armed Forces after September 11, 2001, and for other purposes.
Other Bill Titles (2 more) 4/9/2008--Introduced.
Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 - Amends federal veterans' benefits provisions to entitle to educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill individuals in certain length-of-service categories who, commencing on or after September 11... moreSee Full Bill Text
Committees
Amendments
This bill has no amendments.
Bill Status
| Introduced |  | Voted on by House | | Voted on by Senate | | Considered By President | | Bill Becomes Law |
| April 09, 2008 |
Users tracking H.R.5740 (6) are also tracking:
| People | Bills | Issues |
|---|---|---|
In the News
April 21, 2008 Congress must support vets
all 40 news articles »
April 15, 2008 Fight for a New GI Bill: National Ads Targets Key Lawmakers
and urge lawmakers to support the "21st Century GI Bill" or S.22/ HR 5740. The bill was introduced in Congress by some of the Senate's own combat veterans ...
April 14, 2008 PORTER SUPPORTS EXPANDED GI BENEFITS FOR GUARD AND RESERVE MEMBERS
HR 5740 is companion legislation to S. 22 in the Senate, a bipartisan bill introduced by Sens. Jim Webb and John Warner, both of Virginia. ...
Blog Coverage
July 09, 2008 McCAIN LIES AGAIN
... the president for his strong support of our military, and the entire VFW membership for their untiring effort to get their congressional delegations to cosponsor S. 22 or its companion bill in the House, HR 5740.â ...
July 08, 2008 President Signs New GI Bill Into Law
22 or its companion bill in the House, HR 5740." The new 21st Century GI Bill will pay the highest in-state public tuition rate, and provide for books, fees, and a living stipend. It eliminates the $1200 enrollment fee, ...
Source: Department of North Carolina
June 30, 2008 President Signs New GI Bill Into Law
22 or its companion bill in the House, HR 5740.â The new 21st Century GI Bill will pay the highest in-state public tuition rate, and provide for books, fees, and a living stipend. It eliminates the $1200 enrollment fee, ...
Source: VFW NC Post 670
60 more posts...
See most useful blog posts
Information made available by:
Rating Filter: 5
(Close help)
Comments
(Close help)
I'm a service member currently serving in Iraq and feel that the revised GI Bill's that are currently on the table are fair and service members today deserve an increase in benefits from what is currently received.
The army sells many new trainees on the "money for college" idea, but that money for college is far from adequate to cover costs that make up being a full time student today.
Allowing a service member to have an increased benefit and guranteed housing during the time enrolled would not only help those already enlisted, but would draw another set of possible recruits who have already done their research and would join if they were given an adequate GI BILL supplement after serving their 4+ year contract.
I'm a veteran with 8 years navy working a full-time job to save up for going to college. With this post-911 bill I can now quit and go full time without any major distractions. The current G.I. bill isn't enough to cover, even the cost of living.
I don't think the G.I. bill should be counted as extra-income on the FAFSA (Federal Financial Aid) also. I'm hoping this bill passes to fix this.
I thought the military knew that the major reason recruits join the military is for an education after. How can this bill change what has been there the whole time.
If a soldier volunteers 3/4 years of his life, he/she should be given an education opportunity, it benefits the country to have more educated citizens (more taxes and no welfare.)
I don't agree with the way Iraq is now, but I support our troops 100%, I've been there and that.
After reading some of the text from HR 5740 that promotes better education benefits for military service members, I become concerned for a military comprised of mostly nothing but short-term benefit seekers who have no sense at all of honor, integrity, and country. I'm not some Marine waving the flag here, but I am a recently retired 20 year Air Force war vet who went into the military for what I believe are the right reasons and not to gain a paid-for college education after only three years, which is what is provided in the currently proposed legislation. Do I think that military service members deserve more education benefits for their commitment than are presently offered? Certainly. But after only three years? Absolutely not! Even more galling is the fact that in HR 2642 Congress proposed to have it paid for by only the highest income earning percentage of the general public, not by the entire country, who would all benefit from better educated citizens. By the way, I'm neither in nor ever will be close to that income level of $500,000 per year that would be penalized by HR 2642. Let's keep the military ranks filled by people who want to be there for the right reasons, for a 20 year career hopefully, and see the education benefits and other benefits of military service as nothing but gravy. For pete's sake, do the right thing!!
First of all, there are no right or wrong reasons for joining the service. Shame on you for implying that your 20 years of cushy AF duty is somehow more significant than my 3 deployments in less than 3 years including the year I am currently spending in Afghanistan. I'm in the Navy and I signed up to be on ships but because our government has stretched our forces so thin by ignoring the real threat here in Afghanistan and wrongly invading Iraq, we deploy more often and we are just plain tired. In february I will have finished my six years and then I am DONE! I want to attend the school of my choice and not have to work full time to pay the rent.
hey, the 20 year vet who's desparaged by the fact that someone with only a few years gets benefits.. This isn't about your sour apples buddy. This is about the national security of our nation. With more people serving and getting out, the more people with be trained for the possible wars of the future. Extend contracts, keep people from seperating early BUT BY NO MEANS take away benefits you douche! It's important that our veterans(of even a few years) get this education. It's prospective for the future of American government and economics as well as the national security of america. Treat your people right and get the respect of the country back! Sour puss!
I am a veteran myself and I'm 110% for this bill!
"short-term benefit seekers who have no sense at all of honor, integrity, and country" ... isn't it hypocritical to preach these core values and then say that the way they are attained is by a quantifiable service time. The amount of time you have served in the military has nothing to do with your sense of "honor, integrity, and country" and you are a fool if you believe it does. There was no draft for OIF or EOF, a large percentage of the current lower enlisted and young officer's joined up after the war started knowing full well the dangers and rigors of what they were getting into. If you ask me those who enlisted or were commissioned after the war started have a great sense of "honor, integrity, and country". If you feel like you weren't compensated on an equal level for your longer service, tough beans, show some honor and patriotism and be happy for the young men and women benefitting from this bill.
I would like to address the following inconsistencies between the House Bill (HR5740) and the Senate Bill (S.22) regarding both the duration of duty (36 months for House, 24 for Senate) and the payment benefits. Per my research, the major difference in benefits between the HR5740 version of this bill and the S.22 version is that the House version affords for a once-a-year up to $1000 payment for books and school supplies, while the Senate version affords for much more benefit to the recieving veteran in the form of a up to $1000/ month payment for what seems to be targeted at living expenses. These are two very different situations and I would be curious to find out which one will be made into law.
Add A Comment