Help for National Guard troops

[DocDiggs]

Democrats: States, not D.C., helping Americans

Richardson: Governors increasing military benefits, health care, jobs



SANTA FE, New Mexico (AP) -- States, not the Republican-controlled Congress, are leading the way in resolving problems confronting Americans, New Mexico's Gov. Bill Richardson said Saturday.

Richardson, in the Democrats' weekly radio address, said, "Most people don't see the Republican-led federal government doing anything to give you, your business or your family a helping hand."

He said it took Congress four months to approve legislation to increase the death benefit for soldiers killed in combat. That was a provision in an $82 billion bill signed into law by President Bush on Wednesday.

While Congress was considering the proposal to improve military benefits, Richardson said, three dozen states "have pursued actions to provide greater assistance for our military men and women serving in the National Guard."

In February, for instance, Richardson signed a measure that made New Mexico the first state in the nation to pay for $250,000 in life insurance for its National Guard members.

Richardson, who is mentioned as a potential presidential candidate in 2008, touted policy initiatives by Democratic governors and said Republicans in Washington "continually put partisanship first and everything else second."

"In the last four months," he said, "Democratic governors have cut taxes, expanded access to health care, invested heavily in job creation, improved schools, made college more affordable, reduced crime, and -- while Republicans in Washington turned trillion-dollar surpluses into trillion-dollar deficits -- Democratic governors have actually balanced our budgets."

A former U.S. energy secretary and U.N. ambassador under President Clinton, Richardson contends that Democratic governors should assume a greater role in shaping party strategies and policies if their party hopes to pick up seats in Congress and possibly retake the White House.

[Snowden]

In February, for instance, Richardson signed a measure that made New Mexico the first state in the nation to pay for $250,000 in life insurance for its National Guard members.

That's more like it. And if three dozen states are doing this, we should have a very well-filled National Guard. Now for the other states to step up to bat.

[Woodmonkey]

It is up to the states to take care of most of this. The federal government is limited, or should be, in what it takes on.

[Snowden]

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

It is up to the states to take care of most of this. The federal government is limited, or should be, in what it takes on.

It is the states taking it on, Katie; but isn't the National Guard always funded by the state? Just that finally, perhaps because of the fighting in the Mid East being so dependent upon Guard units, the states are trying to make it more attractive in order to swell their ranks.

It should work.

[Woodmonkey]

Originally Posted by Snowden

It is the states taking it on, Katie; but isn't the National Guard always funded by the state? Just that finally, perhaps because of the fighting in the Mid East being so dependent upon Guard units, the states are trying to make it more attractive in order to swell their ranks.

It should work.

It is the states responsibility. The Guard answers to the governors, not the president. They do get called up though and the feds then pay for that.

[Cavmg101]

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

It is up to the states to take care of most of this. The federal government is limited, or should be, in what it takes on.

Maybe I'm interperting(sp?) this wrong, but last time I checked the Govt MOB'd me to the Middle East under Fed orders not the State.

Why should the Fed Govt be limited in what it does or does not "take on"?? We are all ONE military albeit Guard, Reserve, or Active Duty(RA), and ALL are being sent here(to the big sandbox)


Im just sick and tired of everyone trying to differenciate(sp?) between the Guard, Reserve, and RA. Last time I checked the freaking AIF aint got no qualms between us when the trying to cap our asses over here.

Im AGR(Active Guard Reserve). When I get home I go back to my AGR status, but some of my guys put their lives/jobs on hold to come here (with no complainig mind you). How hard will it be for some of them when they get home?

IMO some of this is a little too late in the "game" to start worrying about. Should it have been identified earlier??....Yes I believe so. Is it great that they are trying hard now??...Yes. But there have been alot of folks prior to us that have felt the "brunt" of the inadequenncy(sp?)

Its good that they are looking at the death benefits. IMO they have been slacking for entirely too long, but there are other benefits that need a hard lookin at also. My wife would be really upset if I came home in a box just to get adequate benefits.(im not planning on that though).

OK vent off...lol

[C130 pilot (ret)]

[quote=Cavmg101]

Its good that they are looking at the death benefits. IMO they have been slacking for entirely too long, but there are other benefits that need a hard lookin at also.

What benefits do you want to have a 'hard lookin at also'?

My wife would be really upset if I came home in a box just to get adequate benefits.(im not planning on that though).

I do not believe that the only way your wife gets adequate benfits is if you are brought back dead. The first benefit she gets if you return aliove is that YOU ARE ALIVE! Could you be more specific please.