This seems like an easy one. A Senate measure was under consideration to ensure federal employees serving in the National Guard and Reserve don’t lose pay when they are activated. The provision was sponsored by a Dem — Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois — but it’s the kind of effort that no one would vote against, right? Not exactly.
The amendment to make up the salary difference for federal employees activated for National Guard or Reserve duty was approved in a voice vote after a Republican attempt to derail it failed, 61-39.
Of the 39 senators who voted against the measure, all were Republican.
Indeed, it’s been downright entertaining to see Dems advocate for amendments on the pending emergency spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Dems keep offering pro-soldier benefits, and Republicans keep rejecting them.
John Kerry, for example, pushed for better benefits for the families of soldiers killed in the war but whose deaths were not combat-related. 25 senators voted against it — all Republican.
Likewise, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) proposed providing nearly $2 billion in additional funding for veterans’ care, arguing that too many VA hospitals are underfunded and overcrowded. 54 senators successfully derailed the amendment — all Republican.
GOP officials will no doubt argue that Dems are too anxious to spend money on the troops in a time of tough budget numbers. Perhaps. But here’s a challenge: how many Republicans voted against better benefits for men and women in uniform but will also vote to repeal the Estate Tax, despite the fact that the cost of that tax cut will be several times more expensive than the Dems’ amendments that help troops and their families?
Remind me again which is the pro-military party?