Thursday, June 19, 2008

"G.I. Bill" benefits more than doubled; other news

• Some are very unhappy with how this will be funded, but, yes, the increase in benefits will be funded. According to the Associated Press (Bipartisan accord reached on war funding bill), a bipartisan agreement reached yesterday would provide “$162 billion in long-overdue funding to carry out military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan into next year.”
.....House passage of the bill, expected Thursday, would also pave the way for a quick infusion of emergency flood relief for the Midwest, a 13-week extension of unemployment payments for the longtime jobless and a big boost in GI Bill college for veterans.

.....The White House — and Capitol Hill Republicans — had signaled greater flexibility in recent weeks after Democrats orchestrated impressive votes to more than double GI Bill college benefits and give a 13-week extension of unemployment payments for people whose benefits have run out.
.....In late-stage talks, Democrats dropped a provision to pay for the GI college benefits by imposing a half-percentage point income tax surcharge on incomes exceeding $500,000 for singles and incomes over $1 million earned by married couples….

.....Conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats are upset that the new GI Bill benefits, with costs tentatively estimated at $62 billion over the next decade, will be added to the deficit instead of being "paid for" as called for under House rules.
....."We know the day of reckoning is coming," said Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Calif., who called the measure "totally irresponsible."
.....The new GI Bill essentially would guarantee a full scholarship at any in-state public university, along with a monthly housing stipend, for people who serve in the military for at least three years. It is aimed at replicating the benefits awarded veterans of World War II and more than doubles the value of the benefit — from $40,000 today to $90,000.
.....Full details of the nuts and bolts of the measure won't be released until Thursday….
• In this morning’s Inside Higher Ed:
A civil grand jury blasted the governing board of San Joaquin Delta College in a report released Wednesday, accusing trustees of misspending millions of dollars in public funds and of repeatedly violating the state’s open records laws by discussing the contents of closed session outside its meetings. “The Grand Jury has no confidence in the Delta College Board of Trustees as they are currently constituted,” its members wrote in the report of their investigation, which was prompted by citizen complaints. “The District needs capable trustees who are able to meet the task of bringing Delta College into the 21st century.”
• In this morning’s New York Times: Seas Rising and Warming Faster Than Realized:
.....On a very busy climate-oil-politics day I was able to just squeak in a short print piece last night on a new study in the journal Nature clarifying what’s happening with the oceans in a heating world (the heat held in by a building greenhouse blanket has largely accumulated in the oceans and physics demands that it will eventually add to atmospheric warming).
.....As you may be aware, those rejecting the enormous body of evidence pointing to a growing human influence on climate had embraced some transitory findings implying that the oceans were cooling. This new work may help resolve that particular line of debate. The formula holds: more CO2 = warming world = less ice + higher seas + lots of changing climate patterns.
.....The study, by Australian and American researchers, reviewed millions of measurements of ocean temperatures taken using a particular instrument on submarines and other vessels over four decades. The researchers found a subtle error that, when fixed, shows that the rate at which seas warmed and rose between 1961 and 2003 was about 50 percent greater than previous estimates.
.....The instrument in question, an expendable bathythermograph, is cheap and disposable, used for example by submarines to find the thermocline, the depth where warm and cold layers of ocean water meet. It was designed to take snapshots of water temperatures, not to collect readings that could be compared year after year, as is required with climate studies. Oceanographers have been trying to identify errors in the ocean-temperature data for awhile....
• Did you notice this one in Tuesday’s OC Reg?
OC tsunami ready
.....We’re not actually ready, of course, but we did meet certain minimal standards. Better than nothing.
.....Dissent has covered the topic of OC tsunamis before:
So Cal Tsunamis?
Preparing for the Big Wet One
The upshot? If a big landslide occurs on the Catalina side of the channel, we've got about ten minutes to prepare for a huge tsunami that will devastate our coast. Such events have occurred historically—and are thus inevitable?—but remain unlikely any time soon.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I share the concerns of how the new GI bill will be paid for. Lower pay raises in the future or even reduced benefits is not the answer. Don't get me wrong, I am happy that so many in the nation want to ensure our service men and women are given their due, after all - I just retired and I have 1 son currently in and another who is realizing his GI bill benefits. As a matter of fact I am astounded at the support - where are the cries from SF and the Counter-Recruiters?

Roy Bauer said...

Well, for what it's worth, we at DtB, though we have opposed this war, have always supported increasing these benefits and generally improving conditions for "our men and women in uniform."

Anonymous said...

It's amazing that people are so worried about paying for GI benefits, but are not similarly worried about paying for the war.

Tom Goering said...

Paying for the war is a short term thing - creating or increasing a benefit is a long term/continuous investment.

Anonymous said...

As a former Marine, this is a good thing. Funny how people could possibly think that the serviceman who is getting shot and fighting the radical scumbags in the middle east which is keeping the Taliban from operating from our homes is not worth $90,000
shame on you. Are you not the same people that say that for every dollar California spends on education the state receives it back? At least the service men and women are not on food stamps.

Anonymous said...

Please explain how paying for the war is a short-term thing. The war has lasted five years now. There's no end in sight.

You used the perfect word in describing the payment for a benefit -- investment. That differs enormously from paying for a war.

Anonymous said...

7:48, are you a war lover, and now asking for a public subsidy after getting to shoot scumbags?

torabora said...

Up until a couple years ago we were paying a telephone tax enacted to pay for WWI !!!!

But we are not paying it any more so I figure that it took about 88 years to pay off THAT war.

I think we can safely conclude that war is one expensive enterprise.

WWI was the "war to end all wars". We might want to remember that, it was quite a whopper of a lie. Actually, it beats the pants off anything W might have lied about. We tend to forget about liars who lived before us.

And so it goes.

Anonymous said...

No, TB, we don't forget the
previous liars (Nixon comes to mid) and W is a prolific liar. He and this administration really have no peer.

Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...