These hardcore House Republicans have tried to argue against the use of a Patriot Premium to provide much-needed funding for our returning veterans’ education, calling it a “small business tax.” In truth, the premium would increase an individual’s taxes by a half-percent on income above $500,000 and would generate an estimated $56 billion over ten years to cover the cost of expanding veterans’ benefits.

Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who is shepherding the war funding bill through the Senate, said expanded education assistance is a cost of war. If President Bush does not want to pay for the war through tax increases or spending cuts, he should not protest veterans' benefits, she said.

The philosophy behind the funding proposal is that the wealthy in American have a responsibility to provide services for our returning G.I.s, particularly in this economy where the gap between the rich and poor is widening deeply. Do we think it fair that our returning soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines should be required to take their places in the suffering lower class without any hope of obtaining an education?

According to OMB Watch, the surtax would only affect 0.3 percent of all taxpayers. That's one third of once percent of Americans. In other words - only the smallest handful of the super wealthy. (see complete chart here)

Congressional Democrats began to put into practice their philosophy of asking the wealthy to shoulder more of the cost of government programs on Thursday as the House approved an expansive new veterans education benefit that would be paid for by a tax on affluent Americans...

In pushing the tax plan, Democrats are banking on the idea that most Americans will have no quarrel with requiring those on the highest economic rung to pay for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan to receive the equivalent of a free four-year college education at a public university.

The proposal is the most striking example so far of a Democratic refrain being heard increasingly in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail: Americans with significant financial resources need to contribute more to efforts to help those less prosperous. House Approves Tax on Rich to Aid G.I.’s

Despite the fact that Tiahrt and Moran (lockstepping conservatives from Kansas) voted against the GI Bill, the bill has nonetheless been supported by dozens of other Republicans. Even John Warner of Virginia, a strong conservative, has supported the bill. In fact, in the end, many Republicans helped to pass the bill.

Unfortunately, few of us were surprised that Moran did not come out in support of this "paid for" G.I. Bill that is so unquestionably deserved by our current generation of war veterans.

Moran has, on numerous occasions, said that he believes in "smaller government" and a reduction of what he always refers to as "mandatory spending". Reducing mandatory spending means that the government would not make promises, in advance, to spend money on benefits for deserving Americans, like seniors and veterans.

Moran has said that he prefers that the government make those decisions on an annual basis in a "discretionary" manner. In other words, if we followed Moran's ideas, we'd never follow through on promises - we'd let it all be left up to the whims of Congress each year.

Well, I believe that our veterans deserve promises. They deserve to know - in advance - what we have promised them in benefits. It's only fair and right. See, we demand many "mandatory" obligations and duties from our servicemen and women. In return, they have a right to expect that we would view our payment of benefits to them as "mandatory" - and not "discretionary."

I disagree with Moran about "discretionary" vs. "mandatory" spending.

Our veterans deserve promises and they deserve to see us follow through on our promises, too.

In recent years, Moran has voted in favor of significant and dramatic cutbacks in veterans healthcare, Medicaid funding and Medicare coverages for our senior citizens. Making cutbacks to benefits has been a pattern with him.

Although his lack of support for this G.I. Bill was just not a surprise to me (since I watch his voting patterns closely), I do wonder if he thinks he's pulling the wool over the eyes of Kansans. His seemingly blanket disregard for Kansas and for our veterans saddens me.

“By voting against the 21st Century G.I. Bill, Reps. Tiahrt and Moran joined House Republicans in favoring millionaires over veterans returning from Iraq,” said Kansas Democratic Party Executive Director Mike Gaughan. “Every day, our brave Kansas military men and women are fighting to defend our rights and freedoms. It is unacceptable for Reps. Tiahrt and Moran to shortchange our veterans when they return home from active duty. It is time for Tiahrt, Moran and Republicans in Congress to stop worrying about their next election flier, and start taking care of our soldiers and veterans.”

At least we do have some good news: both of the Kansas Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the bill.

Nancy Boyda (KS-02) said on Monday that the new bill will make it an attractive tool for the National Guard to recruit new members. Soldiers who have at least three months of active duty since Sept. 11, 2001, would be eligible for the full education benefits. And the benefits would extend for 15 years, up from the current 10 years.

Never has the difference between Rep. Moran and Rep. Boyda been so obvious than in their different reactions to this G.I. Bill.

Think about this: 10% of all U.S. veterans live in the state of Kansas. One small slightly unpopulated state contains 10% of all veterans!

Wouldn't you think that a congressman from Kansas would look out for veterans since veterans make up such a significant percentage of his constituency? Not Jerry Moran. And, not when it counts.

Instead he looks out for the richest few that don't even live in Kansas. The surtax on American millionaires to help veterans would be a tiny sacrifice for the richest 0.3% of taxpayers.

I guess Jerry Moran probably views himself as a member of the richest few and that's why he always votes for them. Or perhaps Moran figures his most important constituency (not in Kansas) is made up of the lobbyists and corporations for the richest few (not in Kansas).

I suppose it's also possible (if not probable) that Moran thinks that American war veterans (that do live in Kansas) aren't necessary for his ability to win the next election. Weighing the campaign contribution value of millionaires versus veterans, perhaps millionaires and their lobbyists win out. I suppose voting against the veterans benefits makes sense to a man like Moran.

It's not the first time that Moran has shortchanged our veterans - and it probably won't be the last.

In recent years we have heard politicians bandy about the phrase “Support the troops.’’ In some cases that has happened, as with increased pay. In some cases it hasn’t, such as in the stories of deplorable conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Indeed, there have been times when “Support the troops’’ seemed to be a phrase and only a phrase. When debates of great import like cutting the length of deployments have arisen, the troops seem to be on the losing end too often.

Congress now has a huge opportunity to support the troops. We’ll see if they take it by passing a new GI Bill...

The new bill, pushed by Webb and a bipartisan group of senators who served in combat, offers benefits for veterans serving after Sept. 11, 2001. It would bring education payments much closer in line to reality and offer veterans something of a novelty these days: The prospect of finishing college debt-free...

The best reason for a new bill is that it’s simply the right thing to do. Unlike in World War II, when the nation was on a war footing, this conflict has asked no sacrifice from the public at large. A great deal has been asked of our all-volunteer military. The nation as a whole has had tax cuts...

With Memorial Day on the horizon, Congress has an opportunity to support the troops...

(Our overworked soldiers richly deserve a new GI Bill)

The G.I. Bill has now moved to the Senate for approval. Let's keep an eye on what happens there.

Meanwhile, to see how your representative in Congress (from your own state or district) voted, you can view the House roll call here.