[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 5384-5385]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           SERVICEMEMBERS EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. BOB STUMP

                               of arizona

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, March 23, 1999

  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Speaker, on March 18, 1999, I introduced H.R. 1182, 
the Servicemembers Educational Opportunity Act of 1999, along with Mr. 
Spence, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Quinn, Mr. Everett, Mr. Hayworth, 
Ms. Chenoweth, Mr. LaHood, Mr. Hansen, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Gibbons, Mr. 
Talent, and Mr. Bilirakis. This measure would enhance benefits under 
the Montgomery GI Bill for persons who enlist in the armed services for 
4 years of active duty service or reenlist for 4 years of such service 
effective October 1, 1999.
  In exchange for a 4-year enlistment or reenlistment, individuals 
would receive an enhanced Montgomery GI Bill that would (a) pay 90 
percent of the costs of tuition and fees, (b) pay a sum equal to the 
reasonable costs of books and supplies, (c) pay a monthly stipend of 
$600 per month for full-time enrollment (or proportional amount for 
less than full-time enrollment), and (d) repeal the current $1,200 
reduction-in-pay to be eligible for the benefit. Each individual would 
be eligible for 36 months (4 academic years) of benefits.
  Our goal in introducing H.R. 1182 is twofold. First, when high school 
students consider their post-high school plans, we want them to 
consider military service as their first option, not their last. It is 
no wonder the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard are experiencing 
major recruitment problems. Most college-bound youth and their parents 
see a tour of military service as a detour from their college plans, 
not as a way to achieve that goal. We want to reverse that way of 
thinking.
  Second, we want to empower the youth of America--our future 
veterans--with a GI Bill that would be limited only by their 
aspirations, initiative, and abilities. We want a GI Bill that would 
allow a young person to be able to afford any educational institution 
in America to which that individual could competitively gain 
admittance.
  Our legislation is inspired by, and is substantively very similar to, 
a recommendation made in the comprehensive January 14, 1999, report of 
the Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition 
Assistance, chaired by Anthony J. Principi.
  As we look to the future, I believe it's instructive to glance at our 
past. As my colleagues are aware, 55 years ago the Congress sent to 
President Roosevelt's desk a piece of legislation that truly 
transformed our Nation--arguably the greatest domestic legislation 
since the Homestead Act. Legislation that is popularly known as the GI 
Bill of Rights. The World War II GI Bill was one of the boldest 
investments our Nation has ever made. It was certainly one of Congress' 
finest hours, because World War II veteran-students did not just pass 
through the American system of higher education, they transformed it. 
That legislation, and those veteran-students, created today's leaders 
and the modern middle class.
  Mr. Speaker, I cannot recount how many times in my 22 years here that 
a Member of this body has said he probably would not be here today if 
it were not for the World War II GI Bill. Our proposal to return to a 
World War II-type GI Bill is not about a program of the past, it's 
about empowerment for the future. Has society, and our values, changed 
so dramatically that a revered education program that was so successful 
55 years ago no longer applies to today's servicemembers?
  For 223 years, military service has been our Nation's most 
fundamental form of National Service. When we talk about education 
policy in this country, I think our starting point is that we owe more 
to those who voluntarily have worn the uniform because they have earned

[[Page 5385]]

more by virtue of their years of service. The fundamental difference 
between the GI Bill that we propose and other meritorious Federal 
student financial aid programs is that ours is truly earned.
  About 60 percent of active duty servicemembers are married when they 
separate from the military, and many have children. They find out 
quickly that the gulf between the purchasing power under the Montgomery 
GI Bill and current education costs is indeed a large one. Today's 
Montgomery GI Bill, properly named for our distinguished former 
colleague who worked indefatigably on the legislation for almost 7 
years prior to its enactment, unfortunately falls short by $6,007 
annually in paying tuition, room and board, fees, books, and 
transportation at public institutions, and $15,251 at private 
institutions. Veterans deserve better. And I note the cost figures I 
cite are for 1996--the most recent data available.
  Through fiscal year 1997, some 13 years after the enactment of the 
Montgomery GI Bill test program, only 48.7 percent of veterans have 
utilized it. Conversely, between 1966 and 1976, 63.6 percent of 
Vietnam-era veterans used their education benefits.
  We need a GI Bill that harnesses the unique resource that veterans 
represent. We want to accelerate, not delay, their entry into the 
civilian work force. We need a GI Bill that rewards veterans for 
faithful service and that makes it more likely that they will serve 
among the ranks of the country's future leaders and opinion shapers.
  What better investment can we make in the youth of this country? A GI 
Bill that would be limited only by the aspirations, initiative, and 
abilities of the young man or woman involved. A GI Bill that largely 
would allow a young person to afford any educational institution in 
America to which that individual could competitively gain admittance. 
What a powerful message to send across America. What an emphatic 
statement to send to working and middle class families who go into 
great debt to finance their children's higher education because they 
are told they make too much money to qualify for Federal or State 
grants.
  In closing, I submit to my colleagues that why my cosponsors and I 
are proposing is not just about an education program that we believe 
would serve as our best military recruitment incentive ever for the 
All-Volunteer Force; or after their service provide unfettered access 
to higher education at the best schools; or provide unbounded 
opportunity for our youth that cuts across social, economic, ethnic, 
and racial lines. What we have proposed is what is best for America.
  I believe the notion of service to our Nation, service in an All-
Volunteer Force, and the corresponding opportunity for all of us to 
participate in our great economic system sustained by that service, is 
a core value we simply must pass on to the next generation. It is a 
core value we can neglect, but only at our own peril.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members of the House to join me in support of 
H.R. 1182.

                          ____________________