Billing our GIs

The phrase “Support the troops” is quite popular these days. It’s the fallback motto for any politician to cue a round of applause and an agreeable bumper sticker. But when support is truly needed, it seems that many of us have forgotten what this phrase really means. \nThis is surely what went through the minds of troops from the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry, a National Guard unit based out of Iowa, who were denied GI Bill benefits because some of their orders were for less than the cut-off of 730 days. Ironically, due to increased need for deployment, they have actually been deployed longer than any other combat unit, inspiring their nickname, the “Ironman Battalion.” To add insult to injury, several of the soldiers’ orders were for 725 to 729 days.\nIt has come as a bit of a nasty shock to many of them, who failed to realize that a problem existed as they began to register for classes. This problem can only be described as ridiculous, a vast administrative oversight that should have never existed in the first place. For a society that has agreed so wholeheartedly that the military deserves our support, hanging these soldiers out to dry is nothing short of embarrassing. We simply can’t allow a disconnect between the military and the rest of society. \nPoor support for the war already erodes the morale of much of the armed services, and while it is perhaps an unavoidable result of dissent over the politics behind the conflict, the last thing we need is a reason for troops who are already worn thin and beaten down to doubt the credibility of those who promise them rewards to their service.\nForemost among these benefits has always been money for education, which is a huge recruiting draw for potential recruits. And bureaucratic problems in claiming these benefits would undoubtedly damage the effectiveness of this recruiting tool. In truth, the military has always been a promising way for people to earn money for their education, and the majority of people who apply for GI Bill benefits get what they are owed. But these successes do not excuse the fiasco of the Ironman Battalion. \nIn response, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota has introduced legislation that extends educational benefits to service members based on the length of their actual service, not just the amount they were supposed to serve. In a climate of common extensions to deployment, this bill should have existed sooner. But it’s better than nothing.\nThe question now is whether the problem will be cleared in time for spring semester. The typically slow wheels of senatorial involvement and military bureaucracy are reasons for concern that this goal may not be achieved. \nBut the biggest issue at hand is not simply this isolated incident, but rather, the sincerity of our words when we say that we “support the troops,” and the potential for oversights like this to occur again. In the military, they constantly stress the need to “take care of your people.” It seems that politicians would do well to remember it.