Why doesn't mccain support the troops?

The new GI bill passed in the senate by a vote of 75-22. John McCain didn't even bother to show up and vote, while many of his fellow republicans voted for it. He has sided with the bush administration in opposing the bill. Bush is expected to veto...

it, but there should be enough votes to override the veto.

How come there is no one in the media calling McCoot out for his flagrant disregard for our troops? Since this stategic blunder called the Iraq War began, McCoot has opposed every single bill that expanded benefits to our returning vets.

Why does he only offer lip service when it come to supporting the troops, but refuses to actually do something for them?

Does this disgust anyone else as much as it does me?

Thankfully, there are enough people in Congress from both parties who recognize that maintaining an all-volunteer military force means you need to offer people benefits for signing up. It shocks me that McCain is not one of these, considering he served in a time when the nation had a draft and it turned out to be really sh*tty.

I'm a veteran, and the GI Bill has done wonderful things for me. It's helped a lot of other people, too. So have provisions for retirement, health care, and other benefits. The reality is, going to an all volunteer military was the smartest decision this country has made in a while, and so far it's worked out. I hope that it will continue to do so despite the current administration's misuse of the military. We need a competent commander-in-chief, and by that I mean someone who does not fire generals simply because they disagree with him.

What was the Bill number?

 
It would help to know what the bill said in order to ascertain whether he was justified in not supporting the bill.

The senate bill is S. 22, and the house bill is HR 5740. It is called the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007, and was introduced by Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel, and has strong bi-partisan support.

it is a bill to expand college tuition benefits to vets, much like the one after WWII. Currently, the existing gi bill actually costs a soldier $1200 to enroll (changed under reagan in 1988) upon initial enlistment to enable the soldier to recieve benefits later. If you don't pay the 1200, you get nothing, and the benefits they do get will only pay about half of a state scools in-state tuition.

McCoot said the new bill is too generous, and that it would discourage re-enlistments. It is a very weak argument because it is also expected to increase recruitment.

Bush and McCoot and a few other Reps are the only ones blocking this. The vote was 75-22 in favor. Yet again. McCoot is on the wrong side of what is best for the troops, as he has with every bill expanding veterans benefits since 9/11. He just doesn't care about them, he only cares that they keep fighting an unneccessary occupation.

There is no justification for McCoot to oppose this bill, other than politcal allegience to Bush.

He is a disgrace to the uniform he once wore.

Having read the bill I will not disagree with McCain but I will not bother commenting either.

Ok, so what are we to take from this response rnealw? You think McCain is right, but you can't or won't tell us why? If you aren't going to share your opinion, then why even say anything?

The reason I don't give more of a statement is I don't feel like putting up with the Headache you would give me. . . If you can't figure out why this bill was not supported nothing I say will sway you.

I know the reason why McCoot SAYS he isn't supporting it. Because it is too generous and it will cause a drop in re-enlistments. I think that it is pretty dispicable for him to use that excuse. Our vets deserve better.

If you can't debate a topic without getting a headache, then don't respond at all. It make me think you are not all that confident of your opinion, or your knowledge of the issue is lacking.

Responce Below. .

...

duly noted...

Just notice the VA is against it also.
Differing views on the pros and cons of S. 22 were offered at a hearing before
the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on May 9, 2007. Senator Webb argued
that S. 22 was comparable to the post-World War I GI bill, would lead to similar
economic growth and expansion, and would also have a positive effect on military
recruitment and on the readjustment experience of veterans.47 In the same hearing,
Daniel Cooper, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) Under Secretary for
Benefits, stated the VA’s opposition, criticizing the bill’s complexity, cost, and
administrative burden. He also argued that it might lead to lower rates of
reenlistment in the military services.48
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34451.pdf

Daniel Cooper, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) Under Secretary for
Benefits, stated the VA’s opposition, criticizing the bill’s complexity, cost, and
administrative burden.

Wow. Good work rnealw. You found a Bush appointee that is is agreeing with Bush. What a surprise!!!

It is a burden? What about the burden our soldiers bear? Does McCain not care about that?

Also the bill has millions of $$$ tacked on it for none related domestic spending. .

Care to elaborate about the non-related millions are being tacked on? I looked and found nothing. That is not the reason McCoot gave as to why he is not supporting it.