http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#134041 Would this not be a grea tbill to pass,As we have a a budget that allows no monies to get to places we can only dream about from inside a house ?????? i say "YOU GO BILL"... 134041@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#64441 I SUPPORT THIS BILL IF THIS BILL WAS PASS.I WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GO TO MY NIECE FUNERAL.WHO WAS STATION IN COLORADO SPRINGS.SHE WAS AN MP IN THE AIR FORCE.BUT LIVE IN MARIANNAS ISLAND SAIPAN.... 64441@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#64442 THIS IS A GOOD BILL WE HAVE TO BE VERY MINDFUL.EVERY DISABLED VETERAN WANT BE ABLED TO USE THE SERVICE BECAUSE OF LIMITATIONS.... 64442@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#60957 Given the number who may travael this benefit could be extended to all Disabled Vetrans with 30% or more. Again the cost would be minimal considering the value of service given by the veterans.... 60957@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#59501 I support this bill and hope it passes, it would make life a lot easier for myself and fellow disabled veterans to keep in touch with their families and be there for our families when their military members deploy. Please pass this bill, so that we can still support the military mission.... 59501@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 26 May 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#54281 I am in favor for this Bill and feel that it should be part of 100% Total and Permanent Disabled Veterans Compensation benefits. Please pass this Bill.... 54281@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 22 Mar 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html#50140 No.... 50140@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_66.html?rev=37145 <p>S. 66 would amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such aircraft.</p> <h2 id="toc0"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>Directs the Secretary of Defense to permit any former member of the armed forces who is entitled to compensation for a service-connected disability rated total by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to travel on military aircraft to the same extent as retired members of the armed forces.</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc1"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 1/6/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc2"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc3"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 37145@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_66.html?rev=35691 <p>S. 66 would amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such aircraft.</p> <h2 id="toc4"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc5"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc6"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc7"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 35691@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_66.html?rev=35692 <p>S. 66 would amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such aircraft.</p> <h2 id="toc8"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc9"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 1/6/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc10"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc11"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 35692@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_66.html 1/6/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. 41969@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:00:00 EST