op-ed
Christian Grantham was a student activist in the late 90s and later was a consultant to domestic policy forums for the Clinton Administration as well as events for HRC and GLAAD.
	latest posts   Has the Rainbow Flag Become Too Gay?   Five Years Ago Today   'Hate Crimes' Justice   'Ex-Gay' in San Francisco   Concerned Women for America: God's Army?

September 28, 2004

Not all things said in Vegas, stay in Vegas. Here is what President Bush told the National Guard Association in Las Vegas September 14 about what he's doing for them in exchange for their service.

BUSH SPIN
"We're improving benefits and the quality of life for our nation's citizen-soldiers. We have expanded health care benefits for Guard and Reserve forces and their family members, giving them access to the military's TRICARE system for up to 90 days before they report and 180 days after deactivation -- and I will ask Congress to make that expansion permanent."
[President's Remarks to the General Conference of the National Guard Association of the United States - 09-14-04]

What the President failed to tell those serving our country is the truth, that President Bush refused to do as much as Democrats wanted. Instead of spending $10 billion over 5 years to take care of America's National Guard and their families through TRICARE, President Bush chose a miscalculated and reckless path that left those serving our country uninsured.

FACTS
The Graham-Daschle amendment again passed the Senate’s version of the FY 2005 Defense Authorization bill by a 75-to-25 margin, and again the Bush administration came out forcefully against it. The amendment contains two provisions, one which would make reservists and their families eligible for TRICARE coverage regardless of their mobilization status, and another that would require the Department of Defense to pay civilian health-care premiums for active-duty reservists, along with their dependents, who elect to maintain their civilian health-care plan.

In all, the Pentagon estimates that this would cost a little less than $2 billion per year for the next five years. Though this is a relatively small amount by Pentagon standards, the Bush administration has expressed its hostility toward allocating Defense Department funds to pay for these provisions. In a letter to the Senate Arms Services Committee dated June 28, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz claimed that the costs of the Graham-Daschle amendment "could only come at the expense of other higher-priority defense needs."
[Some Gratitude - American Prospect - 09-28-04]

Do tax cuts count as higher priorities than taking care of the people who serve our country on the battlefield, Mr. President? What sacrifices are being asked of America's wealthiest 2% to take care of the families of the National Guard?