by Linda Gehring

Created on: August 06, 2008   Last Updated: September 09, 2008

While I can understand the sentiment in the past, since a great many of those that served in the military were pressed into service through drafts, whether or not they agreed with the reasons for the conflict or not, I would have to answer this question in the negative. Why?

Because it actually is unconstitutional for the federal government to give a "privilege or immunity" to some citizens, and not to others, as a class. I know that unfortunately those serving on the Hill don't quite "get" that, and have given many, many classes of citizens more benefits than others (the elderly also), but the Constitution gives them no such power. Those that serve in the military are paid and compensated for their services, just as they were in George Washington's time. Now, not only do they receive the payment while they are actively serving in the military, they get military housing, purchase tax free groceries and other products on military basis, get free medical and dental care. When they "retire" from service, officers and their families are provided those benefits lifelong, and a federal pension. We truly have gone overboard, and appears that the aim in these bills are to make the military an attractive option for our young people. Then, when you have a paid and commissioned military, you have to have a reason or excuse to use them so that they can then also get increased "combat" pay.

Most of the young men and women who are now serving in Iraq and Afghanistan when asked why they enlisted, you get either one of two answers. They either enlisted because they truly felt they were going to be seeking out the perpetrators of 9/11, or they were encouraged by their families or recruiters so that they could serve their time, and then get taxpayer paid college educations. Now, many states are even hopping on the bandwagon and giving state tuition benefits, a double whammy on the citizens who are the ones, after all, paying for these veterans benefits at the cost of their own economies.

Since most of these individuals obtain training in various fields and skills while in the military, to me the solution is that the compensation should either be greater in order to afford them to save for their own college when released from active duty or retirement, or establish specific two year low interest loans for them to pay back, and requiring entrance examinations in order to get these loans. Tuition breaks and credits should be given to those that have already demonstrated college ready skills regardless of federal employment, and college is not nor should be for anyone and everyone.

Another option also would be for our military in order for them to assimilate and return to civilian life would be an opportunity to "transfer" through the civil service system into a position continuing to work for our government and country in another capacity while continuing their educations.

The children of military members did not serve. So even absent the provisions in our Constitution forbidding such a practice, rewarding those that have served personally is one thing. Extended those benefits to their children is over the top, and they should have to apply for scholarships and federal grants as any other high school or college age young adult would.

Learn more about this author, Linda Gehring.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.