RE: http://forums.military.com/mon...ty-options-announced

I first had heartburn with the fact that many people were demanding the option to transfer their education benefits. Many of them wanted to transfer it to thier spouses. Many of these spouses had no viable reason why they couldn't don a uniform and serve to earn those same benefits (excluding those rare cases).

My heartburn derived from the fact that those benefits (at one point in time at least) required the Servicemember to "qualify" for them (ASVAB Scores, etc), not simply wear the uniform. Also, because it allowed otherwise highly capable members to "opt-out" of their responsibility to seek personal and professional development via school.

The way I saw it, the military could link higher education the promotion system in ways that force members to take advantage of the benefits they are provided (without even touching their GI Bill money while on Active Duty. I know it's 'sort-of' linked now, but not where it counts the most . . . at the lower enlisted ranks who will be tomorrow's Senior NCO's.

However, after further thought on the topic, I feel that there are instances where transfer should be authorized (To the Spouse upon the death of the Servicemember [due to hostile act], to the children of Retired Servicemembers).

I feel this not only because I am Retired and have kids that will be university-age during the next 5-7yrs, but because for those like myself who entered the military in the 80's and forked-over the $100/mo during the first year of enlistment "INVESTED" their own money into the system to help propel it to where it is today. Many of whom never took advantage of the benefit. This is why I feel especially strong towards allowing those who contributed money into the program to transfer their benefit. For those who got it simply for serving . . . well, I have little to no support for them being able to transfer benefits for a couple of reasons.

I don't think it's fair that the military opts to give the member their $1,200 back with no interest or anything given that it was pooled with thousands of other peoples $1,200 and made millions in interest.

I only decided to comment on this topic because of an article I read today that said Harvard was letting over 200 of it's staff go because of a decrease in their endowments. It doesn't make any sense. According to reports, Harvard has enough in their endowment fund to allow every person attending Harvard to go to school for free and it wouldn't make a dent in Harvard's fund, but they are letting people go because a minor decrease in the endowment.

Further, the VA must have millions upon millions of dollars in the Education Fund programs they administer because it's the best kept secret in the VA. How much is invested in each program (GI Bill, VEAP, College Fund, Post 9/11 Bill, etc.,)? Where is the money invested and how come there are no published annual reports on the programs status of funds? I'd be ****ed to learn halfway through school that the VA's education fund is in trouble. It's kind of like the Army Emergency Relief fund. . .millions of dollars in it but few grants given and no reports on what's being done with the millions that remain in the pot year after year.

Where is the clarity on these programs. I use my GI Bill/College Fund right now and would love to have an exact dollar figure as to how much is available (not simply "you have 29 months and 3 days of eligibility remaining"). Send me concrete numbers where I can monitor my account instead of just relying on what the VA sends me after my school sends them my paperwork. If bank teller's nickel and pennies from it's customers I can't imagine what could be happening at the VA with these monies!!!

quote:

Originally posted by SFC_Retired:
RE: http://www.military.com/mon...ty-options-announced


However, after further thought on the topic, I feel that there are instances where transfer should be authorized (To the Spouse upon the death of the Servicemember [due to hostile act], to the children of Retired Servicemembers).

While transfer of benefits is not authorized for Veterans; The Spouse and Children of 100% Disabled (service connected) or Deceased (service connected) are Entitled to 45 months of their own benefits under this program: http://www.gibill.va.gov/pamph...Pamphlet_General.htm This is an entitlement - not benefits being transfered to them.

And the Veteran (if able to) may still use his/her 36 months of Entitlement under the program they qualified for.

REF: RetiredCareerCounsel,

Thank You for the clarification and very useful information.

While I was not aware of the entitlement you mentioned for 100% Disabled Vets [Service Connected], I was aware of the entitlements due to Service-Connected Deaths. However, from what I have witnessed with one of the Widow's I was assisting as a Casualty Assistance Officer, the education benefits fell short of what's offered by the GI Bill. I could have been only viewing it from what the max GI Bill benefit was and forgot to factor in the other options that boosted the final monthly payment amount to $1,871 for the G.I. Bill [additional factors added in were the Army College Fund and the $600 Kicker] whereas the Widowed Spouse was receiving a little more than $800 a month education entitlement.

Anyway, it is still a phenomenal entitlement and I wish we heard about some of the success stories associated with these, especially from the families of the 100% Disabled Vets.

quote:

Originally posted by SFC_Retired:
REF: RetiredCareerCounsel,

Thank You for the clarification and very useful information.

While I was not aware of the entitlement you mentioned for 100% Disabled Vets [Service Connected], I was aware of the entitlements due to Service-Connected Deaths. However, from what I have witnessed with one of the Widow's I was assisting as a Casualty Assistance Officer, the education benefits fell short of what's offered by the GI Bill. I could have been only viewing it from what the max GI Bill benefit was and forgot to factor in the other options that boosted the final monthly payment amount to $1,871 for the G.I. Bill [additional factors added in were the Army College Fund and the $600 Kicker] whereas the Widowed Spouse was receiving a little more than $800 a month education entitlement.

Anyway, it is still a phenomenal entitlement and I wish we heard about some of the success stories associated with these, especially from the families of the 100% Disabled Vets.

I see these success stories every day at work with the spouses/children using these benefits.

Base rate on CH35 is now $915.00 and they get 45 months of benefits where as Veterans only normally receive 36.

Base rate on CH30 is only $1321.00 per month - talked to alot of veterans who claim they were never told about the $600.00 buy-up kicker and were not given the Army College Fund when they enlisted - usually because they took the bonus instead.

Well, I have served for over ten years and am being discharged for a disability, so I obviously can not extend my service. How can I let my spouse use my GI benefits? I don't think they thought of guys like me. And there are a lot of us out there who are being involuntarily discharged, so how can we transfer benefits to our relatives???

quote:

Originally posted by 2696904:
Well, I have served for over ten years and am being discharged for a disability, so I obviously can not extend my service. How can I let my spouse use my GI benefits? I don't think they thought of guys like me. And there are a lot of us out there who are being involuntarily discharged, so how can we transfer benefits to our relatives???

You can not. As I've previously stated in 30 or 40 posts, the only reason Transferability was added in to the law last year is because Dept. of Defense requested it be added as a Recruiting and Retention Tool. Transferability was not added in for Veterans. If you have 100% service connected disability rating, your spouse and children would receive education benefits under this program: http://www.gibill.va.gov/pamph...Pamphlet_General.htm

As a Viet Nam vet, why are we not allowed to transfer to our kids going to college? Are we any different?

Why is it that retiree's are always "left out", of almost everything, including this. Why can't a service members who retired before August 2009 be eligable for the trasferability options? Using the "retention" excuse is getting old, and does not hold up anymore. Most of the services reached their rention goals a couple months ago, and several of the services have new recruits "stacked" up just waiting on slots/dates for recruit training.

Why can't a person who served 28 years, and retired say 04/05 timeframe be eligable to transfer these benifits to their dependents if they so desire? Why, because as has been the norm, once the government gets what it wants out of them, they are discarded and "forgotten". Every year more and more benifits for "retiree's" go on the chopping block, but there seem to be little to no concern for them, after they are't "Warfighters" anymore, they are the "has beens"

I agree with the retiree's on a emotional level i don't from a fiscal point if the military cover's the retiree where is the cut off how far back do they go WWII, WWI, Korea if they make it retroactive it could cost Billions of more dollers which dont exist. Yes they served with honor and should get the benifits that were avalible at the time if you keep making new benifits retro active for those that are out you will completely break the system. If you doubght that ask Ford, GM, Crystler and thier Union's how that worked out for them every time thier unions lobbyed for a new benifit the retiree's also got it well now thier all broke. I think this is a great deal my wife has been going to school part time for a couple of years and i would love to transfer my GI bill to her because i haven't used it i have gotten my education thru the military. No i donot have a degree but i have more total credit hours than my commander who has a masters degree.

Make them dress in the uniform of the day for a few years before schooling them. I served when they cut off the GI bill, started some VEAP type crap only to find I was out of luck if I could not school full time.

The MGIB is a great recruiting tool. But I don't see how giving transfer of benefits to new recruits is a recruiting tool. Most of the new recruits are fresh out of high school or college and have no spouses or children. Many of the career militar that you are trying to retain likely are in their late 20s or 30s making somewhat unlikely they have college age kids. I am retired now and I have 3 college age boys who put up with moving and me being absent for over 15 years. I have basically complete my education. Why not extend this benefit to retirees children as a way of saying thanks for going through so much while your parent(s) defended our country. Take this to congress...I think this would be a far greater investment in our future than bailing out ailing banks and automobile manufacturers...NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND>>>>HUH...

quote:

Originally posted by 6697147:
The MGIB is a great recruiting tool. But I don't see how giving transfer of benefits to new recruits is a recruiting tool. Most of the new recruits are fresh out of high school or college and have no spouses or children. Many of the career military that you are trying to retain likely are in their late 20s or 30s making somewhat unlikely they have college age kids. I am retired now and I have 3 college age boys who put up with moving and me being absent for over 15 years. I have basically complete my education. Why not extend this benefit to retirees children as a way of saying thanks for going through so much while your parent(s) defended our country. Take this to congress...I think this would be a far greater investment in our future than bailing out ailing banks and automobile manufacturers...NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND>>>>HUH...

The new recruits do not get to transfer their benefits to spouse/child until they have served atleast 6 years.

RE: "I first had heartburn with the fact that many people were demanding the option to transfer their education benefits. Many of them wanted to transfer it to thier spouses. Many of these spouses had no viable reason why they couldn't don a uniform and serve to earn those same benefits (excluding those rare cases).
________________________________________________
My husband doesn't need or want his G.I. Bill education benefits - he has his masters' degree and doesn't want to go any further. I am thrilled he wants to transfer his benefits to me, his wife. The same wife that (although she didn't don the military uniform), had to either repair or get repaired all the things that broke around the house while he was serving overseas like the septic tank, airconditioner, pool pump, roof leaks, car transmission and yard eatten up by bugs. This same wife took care of all the needs of the children (too numerous to list), worked at a full-time job, went through 4 major hurricans without him all awhile waiting on pins and needles for his safe return. I think we somehow qualify for a few education credits for OUR service here at home.... anyway, my wonderful husband thinks so!

*BTW regarding "Thier spouses" in your writing..."Their" is spelled with the e before the "i"..one of the things I taught my children while my husband was overseas.

OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don your Kelvar, Flak Vest and Eye Protection - Someone has their warpaint on.

lol

Just to make sure I'm reading right...My husband is now retired and already has his degree. He was just approved for the 9/11 GI. We were looking into a transfer to our children (3 in college)...from what I'm reading this is not possible...he is the only one that can use it as a retiree? I guess he could always get a PH.D lol.

quote:

Originally posted by 18240993:
Just to make sure I'm reading right...My husband is now retired and already has his degree. He was just approved for the 9/11 GI. We were looking into a transfer to our children (3 in college)...from what I'm reading this is not possible...he is the only one that can use it as a retiree? I guess he could always get a PH.D lol.

Yes you are right. His being approved to use the Post 9/11 GI Bill has nothing to do with transfering his benefits to your children or you. Only soldiers who are on Active Duty on 1 August 2009 or after are eligible to transfer their benefits to spouse/children.

quote:

Originally posted by MCBombTech:
Why is it that retiree's are always "left out", of almost everything, including this. Why can't a service members who retired before August 2009 be eligable for the trasferability options? Using the "retention" excuse is getting old, and does not hold up anymore. Most of the services reached their rention goals a couple months ago, and several of the services have new recruits "stacked" up just waiting on slots/dates for recruit training.

Why can't a person who served 28 years, and retired say 04/05 timeframe be eligable to transfer these benifits to their dependents if they so desire? Why, because as has been the norm, once the government gets what it wants out of them, they are discarded and "forgotten". Every year more and more benifits for "retiree's" go on the chopping block, but there seem to be little to no concern for them, after they are't "Warfighters" anymore, they are the "has beens"

I agree! I just found out about this new program but retired last October after 28 years (1/2 active, 1/2 reserve), so, although I am eligible, I think my son should be able to have the benefits transferred to him since he also "served" during all my departures and deployments! Hopefully someone will see this and come up with the correct solution for those who have retired during the eligibilty timeframe of this program! Semper Fi, MAJDAD

Go After congress if you're that passionate about it. They wrote the law

Jag's will not pursue this, it is not their realm to sue anyone, let alone congress. Neither will a lawyer. It's not lawsuit worty, It's a federal law that was enacted and changed.

Your huband still has the right to use it, under the terms of the contract that HE signed up for. There is no breech of anything.

There is not court that can make Congress enact any legislation or to change a provision. They can determine that something is unconstitutional, but this is not an issue. They had an agreement with your husband. If he paid in and received a Honorable discharge, he is entitled to certain benefits. Congress gave those who served after 9/11 additional benefits that they where not contractually entitled to, but that Congress and the American People thought they deserved. Congress choose to let some individuals who would stay on AD after a date to transfer their rights.

You did not earn anything, it was your husbands service. You choose to be married to a service member who made it a career. You have chosen a career in law. You might want to ask one of your law professors what the rights are.

You might also want to find out the limits of claims against the government.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave_M:
You have chosen a career in law. You might want to ask one of your law professors what the rights are.

You might also want to find out the limits of claims against the government.

I was thinking the same Dave

As a law student, even only one year in, one would think that by now the basics of contract breeches and laws would have been learned.

thanks for the spelling lesson

point is, you have to fight this by getting law changed, and good luck. I doubt it will happen. As stated above the taxpayer burden would be huge if they made it retro-active. Part of the reason why the system was virtually self-suffficient previously is the number of people who paid in and got nothing out, honestly. But the GI Bill was a contract between the vet and the government.

His service earned the benefit, not yours. and the idea that spouses should maintain the ability to take it despite divorce is absurd. I know of a few who talked hubs into re-enlisting for an SRB, took the money, then filed for divorce onlt to do that to another. What would prevent someone from doing the same with the GI Bill?

I personally think it was a bad idea to allow benefits transfer at all, but that's neither here nor there. I don't write laws.

I do not see where you were attacked. This is a public forum. You entered, made comments, those comments were responded to by experienced veterans who donate their time freely to assist those who have problems or ask questions.

I will respond to your feeling of entitlement to use the benefit your spouse's earned by fulfilling his contractual duties in the Armed Forces - NO - You did not earn an entitlement to this benefit as this was not a benefit being offered when you married your spouse, nor was it being offered when he enlisted nor offered everytime he reenlisted. You served your spouse and children not your country, you were not being shot at, shelled, etc in a hostile environment.

I signed contracts as a representative of the US Army on a daily basis for 18 plus years. I do have an understanding of what the congressional laws are/were over the last 30 years and how they affected rights/privileges/ benefits of the enlisted soldiers in the US Army.

I have seen not one spouse whom felt they had "earned" this entitlement prior to the law being passed 1 July 2008. Now a great many people feel that by supporting their spouse during their spouse's service, that they now have some magicaly entitlement because Congress decided to reward those who served on active duty after 1 August 2009.

Yes, That is THOSE WHO ARE CURRENTLY SERVING ON Active Duty as of 1 August 2009. No one who served prior to this date is eligible/entitled to the Transfering of Education Benefits under the Post 9/11 GI Bill.

Congress and Department of Defense had to set a starting point for this program. That is the date they set. Only Congress can amend this law. All a court would do is maybe declare it is unconstitutional for some reason. If a class action law suit was filed, the court would not have the authority to amend this law.

I do wish that they had made this retroactive as it would be nice to have this available to pay for my two sons college education which is coming out of my pocket every month.

BUT I AM NOT ENVIOUS OF THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN GRANTED THIS PRIVILEGE.

The poster the 3 of us where responding to has deleted her posts.

DoD publishes reports on the education benefits funded by DoD. Last time I checked, that was very well funded. VA probably has published reports as well and they pay far more education benefits than DoD. The funding is different between the two though: DoD actually has a fund, VA is on a pay-as-you-go basis.

As to the issues of fairness, there's a balance to be had. Education benefits for military members have been increased - that's a good thing. It's also easier to run away with a larger education benefit after your contract is complete (particularly if transferability doesn't interest you) - that may not be so good. To balance out people running away, you can choose to serve 4 more years after your first 6 for the right to transfer. If the transferability conditions seem unfair, I recommend you talk to the people in your branch of service. Each branch of service decides exactly how transferability eligibility is determined.

On the $1,200 - that $1,200 reduction of pay goes to some black hole in Treasury. It doesn't get invested in anything and isn't used to offset DoD costs. Same thing with the buy-up $600 - it goes to some black hole in Treasury.

Hope this helps.

quote:

Originally posted by GIBillGuy:
DoD publishes reports on the education benefits funded by DoD. Last time I checked, that was very well funded. VA probably has published reports as well and they pay far more education benefits than DoD. The funding is different between the two though: DoD actually has a fund, VA is on a pay-as-you-go basis.

As to the issues of fairness, there's a balance to be had. Education benefits for military members have been increased - that's a good thing. It's also easier to run away with a larger education benefit after your contract is complete (particularly if transferability doesn't interest you) - that may not be so good. To balance out people running away, you can choose to serve 4 more years after your first 6 for the right to transfer. If the transferability conditions seem unfair, I recommend you talk to the people in your branch of service. Each branch of service decides exactly how transferability eligibility is determined.

On the $1,200 - that $1,200 reduction of pay goes to some black hole in Treasury. It doesn't get invested in anything and isn't used to offset DoD costs. Same thing with the buy-up $600 - it goes to some black hole in Treasury.

Hope this helps.

Sorry, no little green men at area 51 and no mystery black hole at the Treasury for the $1200.00/$600.00 paid into the MGIB Program.

5 minute search at the Department of Defense Web Site resulted in this information:

DoD Financial Management Regulation Volume 12, Chapter 15
15-7
1506 FUNDING FOR EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.
150601. The Veteran’s Educational Assistance Act of 1984 established a trust fund
to finance DoD education liabilities on an actuarially sound basis. The DoD Education Benefits
Fund is a trust fund used to accumulate funds for transfer to the Department of Veterans Affairs
(DVA) to cover the DoD share of benefits. The Fund, 97X8098 - Department of Defense
Education Benefits Fund (Education Fund), contains the following assets:
A. Amounts paid into the Education Fund from the active duty and
reserve personnel appropriations.
B. Any amount that may be appropriated by the Congress to the
Education Fund.
C. Interest earned as a result of the investment of available Education
Fund cash balance in U.S. Government securities. This method of funding the educational
assistance program became effective July 1, 1985.
150602. Amounts payable to the Education Fund shall be based on determinations
by a board of actuaries as to the amounts necessary to finance DoD educational liabilities on an
actuarially sound basis. The accounting principles contained in Chapter 16 of this Volume also
apply to the education benefits programs.
150603. Amounts to be transferred to the Education Fund shall be obligated by
Components at the same time military pay is obligated as required in Volume 3, Chapter 8, of this
Regulation and further explained in Chapter 16 of this Volume.
150604. The Act provides for withholding a total of $1,200 (in 12 equal monthly
installments) from the basic pay of active duty military members who elect to participate in the
new educational program. The Military Departments shall deposit the withheld funds to the
general fund of the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. The miscellaneous receipts subaccounts
are identified in paragraph 150606.B, below.
150605. The DVA pays all claims for benefits under the educational program. The
DVA also funds the basic educational benefits for active duty military members from a general
fund appropriation. An additional basic benefit may be paid at the discretion of the Secretary of
Defense. However, this is funded in the military personnel appropriations by the Department of
Defense as are all supplemental benefits. These funds shall be paid into the Education Fund for
subsequent transfer to the DVA.
150606. The Education Fund is used to accumulate funds for transfer to the DVA
to cover the DoD share of benefits. The Director, DFAS, shall account and report for the DoD
Education Benefits Fund since it is an Office of the Secretary of Defense account. In addition, the
DoD Financial Management Regulation Volume 12, Chapter 15
15-8
Director, DFAS, shall invest the cash balances of the Education Fund not actually needed to cover
transfers to the DVA for payment of benefits.
A. For amounts withheld from active duty members, a general fund
proprietary receipt account has been established to which collections of military personnel
contributions are deposited. However, the funds collected are treated as proprietary receipts of
the DVA, rather than of the Department of Defense, with the appropriate offset against budget
subfunction 702 (Veterans’ Education, Training, and Rehabilitation).
B. Even though the Department of Defense does not receive credit for
the offsetting receipts, it is responsible for collecting the contributions from individuals
participating in the program. To ensure proper crediting of the collected funds, all contributions
shall be deposited monthly to miscellaneous receipt account 362473 - Contributions from Military
Personnel, Veteran’s Educational Assistance Act of 1984. At the DVA’s request, actual deposits
shall be made to the following subaccounts:
362473.1 - Army
362473.2 - Air Force
362473.3 - Navy
362473.4 - Marine Corps
It is essential that the funds be deposited to Treasury index number “36” (DVA) rather than the
index numbers for each Military Department.
150607. Each Military Department shall provide the DVA a monthly letter report of
funds deposited to Miscellaneous Receipt account 362473. The report shall show only the net
amount deposited with no detail.
A. Submit the report in time to reach the DVA no later than the close
of business on the seventh workday after the close of the reported month. The following address
shall be used for sending the reports:
Department of Veterans Affairs (047H1)
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420
ATTN: C.O. Finance (047H1)
B. If the report cannot be submitted in time to reach the DVA by the
seventh workday after the reported month, the Military Department shall report by facsimile
(FAX) machine the amount deposited. The report should be “faxed” to the Department of
Veterans Affairs Central Office, Field Finance Division.

"Ignorance is bliss for the uninformed/ uneducated"

Right, the $1,200 goes to Treasury (which I refer to as the black hole). If it doesn't get into DoD's hands, it might as well go into a black hole. Of course, from a government wide perspective, it's still going to the government.

"The Act provides for withholding a total of $1,200 (in 12 equal monthly installments) from the basic pay of active duty military members who elect to participate in the new educational program. The Military Departments shall deposit the withheld funds to the general fund of the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. "

Said another way, as your post confirmes; "the Department of Defense does not receive credit for the offsetting receipts".

I'm sure it's tracked appropriately at DoD/VA, etc., but DoD doesn't get the money for that $1,200 or the $600 cost of participating in buy-up.

I would appreciate it if you stopped calling me ignorant, uninformed, uneducated, etc. If you see something I post is wrong, you're welcome to correct me. I'm only here to help.

What has called you names, they have discussed the fine details of the policy. The DOD transfers the money to the VA who administers the GI bill. It goes into the big pot of money that is the budget. Once collected, the DOD is not involved in the GI bill.

If you're asking me how RetiredCareerCounselor has called me names, he ended his response to me with "ignorance is bliss for the uninformed/uneducated". The particular funding we're discusing is the $1,200 for participating in Chapter 30, which eventually goes to the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. I was correcting the thought from a previous poster that this $1,200 was invested somewhere for use later.

The article I posted clearly shows that DoD transfers the $1200.00 and also the $600.00 to the Department of Veterans Affairs to use to administrate the 6 different Education Programs not some mystical black hole in the treasury department. You may then go to the Department of VA web sites and track where they apply this monies if you desire. It's all open records.