Guardsmen, Reservists Seek More Benefits for Gulf Service

Should National Guardsmen and reservists who fought in the Persian Gulf War be eligible for the same benefits traditionally enjoyed by active-duty troops who have served in battle?

That question is being debated by Congress as lobbyists for the reserves and the Guard petition lawmakers for added perks.

Since the Gulf War began, lawmakers have introduced more than 100 bills aimed at providing increased benefits for called-up reservists and guardsmen.

Among the bills are proposals to authorize the Veterans Administration to provide therapy for war-related marital and family problems and to provide modest increases in educational benefits, imminent-danger pay, family separation pay and housing allowances.

Lobbyists are also pushing for other benefits, including one to establish a fund for making low-interest loans to small-business owners whose livelihoods were threatened by the mobilization, and another to make jobless benefits available to reservists for a longer time.

Proponents argue that the reservists and guardsmen ought to be entitled to the extra benefits because they risked their lives in battle.

Policy-makers say that the Gulf War proves that the reserves are essential to maintaining an effective fighting force in the face of the huge manpower cutbacks scheduled for the next five years.

Supporters contend also that improving benefit packages for the National Guard and reserve forces would be a savvy political move.

Most of the units are made up of “hometown” groups that have become heroes in their communities as a result of their Gulf service.

“When the President’s decision was made in late August (of 1990) to call up the Guard and reserve, they went from those towns like Lawton, Okla.,” said Capt. Victor Dubina, spokesman for the National Guard Assn., the Guard’s major lobby group.

“They had a field artillery unit go that was made up of your friend, your neighbor and your brother,” Dubina said. “The National Guard lives out in the community, in civilian life.”

Skeptics point out that the cost of such benefit increases could be significant and might set a bad precedent for call-ups of guardsmen and reservists in future wars.

“Obviously, they went and fought,” noted Lawrence Korb, a former senior Pentagon official and military affairs expert who is now at the Brookings Institution. “The question is to what extent are we liable for the results of that?”

It isn’t clear how far Congress will go in increasing benefits for reservists.

Although the number of bills in the hopper has shrunk since the Guard and reserve units began trickling home, legislative support for broadening the scope of basic services provided to Gulf War veterans has continued to strengthen.

Analysts say that, even in a year of slashed budgets, the backup forces are likely to get a significant part of the benefits that they have been seeking.

“If we expect reservists to fulfill the same responsibilities as the active duty (forces), they ought to have similar protection, or the all-volunteer force is not going to work,” said Gen. Evan Hultman, executive director of the Reserve Officers’ Assn.

“Those volunteers are going to say sayonara (goodby).”