Military Update
Allowing transfers of GI Bill benefits advocated
Military Update focuses on issues affecting pay, benefits and lifestyle of active and retired servicepeople. Its author, Tom Philpott, is a Virginia-based syndicated columnist and freelance writer. He has covered military issues for almost 25 years, including six years as editor of Navy Times. For 17 years he worked as a writer and senior editor for Army Times Publishing Co. Philpott, 49, enlisted in the U.S. Coast Guard in 1973 and served as an information officer from 1974-77.
By Tom Philpott
Allowing military careerists in hard-to-fill job specialties to transfer half of their GI Bill education benefits to family members is an attractive idea that some service personnel chiefs now say they can support.
But if the measure passes the Senate again this year, which seems likely, and clears the House, which remains unlikely, careerists should credit the dogged determination of Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.).
Cleland, a first-term Senator, Vietnam War veteran and triple amputee, became chairman of the military personnel subcommittee this month after Democrats suddenly became the majority party in the Senate when James Jeffords shifted from Republican to Independent.
In his first hearing as panel chairman July 18, Cleland signaled that reform of the Montgomery GI Bill, particularly the addition of a transferability feature, remains his top priority. Indeed, his first witness was the program's namesake, retired Rep. G.V. "Sonny" Montgomery, who said GI Bill rates need to be raised and the program, as Cleland put it, made "more family friendly."
Montgomery recalled that his original GI Bill proposal, in 1984, had a transferability feature, but it had to be dropped to win Senate approval. This year, the House unanimously has voted to raise GI Bill benefits from $650 a month to $1,100 over the next three years. Ironically, it's a senator leading the fight now for transferability.
To hold down costs, Cleland has modified his bill from last year. Service members could transfer only up to half of their GI Bill benefits to a spouse or a child. To be eligible, the member would have to be in a critical skill, have at least six years of service and agree to stay for at least another four years.
During the hearing, Cleland got words of support on transferability from Vice Adm. Norbert Ryan, chief of naval personnel. Testifying with the other personnel chiefs and David Chu, under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, Ryan seemed to share Cleland's enthusiasm for GI Bill transfers.ÊThe Navy, he said, would offer them only to members with certain skills having 10 or more years of service.
Chu's highest priorities for personnel, he explained later that day to the House Armed Services Committee, are:
• Approval of the administration's targeted military pay raise for next January, which would range from 5 percent up to more than 11 percent, depending upon rank and years of service. Chu urged Congress to approve this plan, which is backed by a Pentagon study, rather than two more costly alternatives from Reps. John Murtha and Ike Skelton.
• Reducing out-of-pocket costs for members living off base by accelerating gains in Basic Allowance for Housing.
• Improving the work environment for all service members as part of an overall quality-of-life initiative.
Ryan and his counterpart in the Marine Corps, Lt. Gen. Garry Parks, urged lawmakers to suspend the Oct. 1 start date of a law passed two years ago that requires payment of $100 a day to any service member deployed more than 400 days out of the previous 730.
Parks and Ryan said they understand Congress merely wanted to protect service members from burnout. But their services need more time to identify persons who might be eligible for the payments and to assess the impact of those costs on future deployments.
Lt. Gen. Timothy Maude, the Army's deputy chief of staff for personnel, asked Congress for help in reducing its shortage of captains by allowing the Army to lower time-in-service minimums to make O-3 from 42 months down to 36.
Questions, comments and suggestions are welcome. Write to Military Update, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville, VA 20120-1111, or send e-mail to: milupdate@aol.com.
