<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for DragonflyDM</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/DragonflyDM/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:43:21 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Update &amp;#8212; The New G.I. Bill</title><link>http://themoderatevoice.disqus.com/update_8212_the_new_gi_bill/#comment-791788</link><description>I followed this issue very closely. This history of the Bill was initially avoided by Senator McCain until the a few months ago, when Secretary Gates and President Bush both threatened to veto the Bill citing that "if we gave them this Bill, it would hurt retention." They cited a study that acknowledged that the military could expect a 16% decrease in retention if the new G.I. Bill was passed.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;After that, Senator McCain backed the republican party's leader, until he was able to sign on to a counter G.I. Bill. That Bill offered a flat $2,000 per month program, and the ability to transfer the benefits to the family members.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;While the majority of the G.I. Bill that passed was from Senator Webb's original plan, many of the compromises came from the secondary Bill that Senator McCain endorsed. It was the amendments (and the overwhelming congressional vote) that convinced President Bush to reassess his "veto" and sign the Bill into law.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DragonflyDM</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:43:21 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>