http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2385.html#38607 What about those of us who served prior to 09/11/01. Received disabilitites and have to poor through mountains of paperwork and repeatedly denied benefits... 38607@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:05:21 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2385.html#37803 I agree with removal of Sec 3313. I have already spent the money and have a graduate degree. I could use the funds to continue with a PHD.... 37803@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:40:12 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2385.html#33644 I read the 21st century GI Bill, including hr 5651 and also s.22. The only "holes" I saw was you had to serve for 36 months after September 11, 2001. Have you read either of the bills I'm just curious b/c those really are the only stipulations. If your curious just type in s.22 or hr 5651 into google and read the full bill. I'm sure you can figure it out.... 33644@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 02 May 2008 16:19:15 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2385.html#24529 Sec. 3313 (2) should be removed from this bill. Are we not good enough for a graduate degree? The only stipulation should be the benefit period of 36 months and the required service.... 24529@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:30:51 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2385.html#16553 About time the G.I. bill "holes" that have accumulated since it's inception are closed. I'm a VEAP Victim myself so I really want to see this sorted out. The costs are more than repaid by the increased productivity of soldier/sailors/airmen/coast guardsmen returning to civilian lives. Of course, it is also a Democrat attempt to attack the weak Republican record of support for veterans, but the bean counters (and Rummy, good riddance) left their flank open by ommission. I miss the Reagan Era Republican leadership as opposed to the current ship of fools.... 16553@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 20 Jun 2007 21:12:58 EDT