Published: July 05, 2008 01:06 am            

Symbolism over substance!

Webster's Dictionary defines 'symbolism' as "the use of a thing as representing another, because it suggests the essential quality of the other...; but implying most strongly that the thing represented is worthy of reverence...or cannot be easily expressed in words." The word 'substance' (according to Mr. Webster) means, "that which underlies outward manifestation; the essential nature of the essential part...material...solidity, worth."

From the lowest local to the highest national levels, the one thing that politicians do well is use symbolism when they should be dealing with substance.

And what most of us forget, and the news media only touches on lightly, is the fact (i.e., substance) that the folks who control the money, make the rules — it doesn't matter who the mayor of a town is; the city council controls the money. It doesn't matter who is in the White House, Congress controls the money — and makes the rules.

On the national level, a good example of this happened this week. There was a ceremony at the White House on Monday. There was a lot of hoopla from almost all the news media. The president signed the "War Supplemental Spending Bill." The one thing everyone talked about was the "GI Educational Bill" it included. Although it is always good to give our brave servicepersons a better education bill, a lot of the details were not publicized.

There are a lot of "little details" which weren't talked about by the news media. So if you are interested in applying for benefits under this new law, it is strongly suggested that you get a copy of the entire law and read it. The most positive news coverage has been about the "transferability" of this bill, as though it was something brand new. It's not. The GI Montgomery Bill included transferability in some situations. This bill does have a transferability clause, but again, there are 'requirements' that have not been discussed. For instance, the service member must have served at least 10 years of active duty before he/she is able to transfer the benefits to a dependent child. If the service member has served at least six years, and re-enlists for another four year tour, he/she can transfer his/her eligibility sooner; but only to a spouse. Oh, and no one already retired will qualify for the transferability option. Also, the benefit plan starts over a year from now.

The War Supplemental Spending Bill including $165.4 Billion to support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, until June 2009. So, it doesn't matter what any politician says, or who wins in the upcoming elections, we are committed to at least one more year by this Congress.

But this bill includes more. $26.9 Billion for a host of domestic programs including Midwest flood relief and the rebuilding of levees down the Mississippi River. It also includes billions for the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and International Food aid. It is great that Congress is finally getting around to correcting the structural problems of the Mississippi River levees, and it is good to help those poor folks who are suffering so much in the Midwest, and around the world. But, what do any of these issues have to do with supporting the war effort or making life better for our military and veteran community? By the way, the House of Representatives passed this overwhelmingly, and the Senate passed it 92-6!

And, in this bill Congress did not even address some major issues which affect millions of veterans and their families every day. One is the present 'requirement' that a veteran must serve at least 90 days of active duty other than for training, one day of which was during a time of declared war to qualify for a VA pension. This 'requirement' in the 38 CFR (the law) causes financial hardships beyond words for those who have served very honorably, but in a time when we were legally at peace. No American veteran should be penalized because he/she was too old or young to have served during any particular time frame!

Folks this is an election year. The one time politicians do listen to the people is during an election year. But, if each individual doesn't let the candidates know how you feel, the result will be the same old thing we have now — a lot of symbolism, and very little substance.



• Submitted by Bobby C. Jerone, Independent Veterans Advocate and President of the American Legion Auxiliary Unit No. 257, Meridian. She can be reached at (601) 679-5055 or bvj1101@bellsouth.net.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.