Saxby Chambliss: “these next couple of votes involve an amendment I filed and an amendment the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, has…”

“these next couple of votes involve an amendment I filed and an amendment the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, has filed. I think the significant thing about both amendments is that we are finally starting to recognize that, because we are calling up our Guard and Reserve folks on an all too regular basis these days, and because today, as we enjoy the freedoms that we sometimes take for granted in this country, we have troops serving in Iraq, 60 percent of whom are Guard and Reserve troops, it is necessary that we continue down the path we have been down for the last several years under the leadership of Senator Warner and Senator Levin, trying to increase the benefits to our Guard and Reserve and the families of those brave men and women. Both these amendments seek to do that. There is a fundamental difference in the two amendments, though. My amendment, the underlying amendment, provides for a reduction in retirement age from 60 to 55 for reservists, based upon the activation of those reservists and Guard men and women into contingency areas. For every 3 months they have been activated and sent into a conflict, they receive a 1-for-1 or 3-month reduction in the retirement age, from 60 down to the minimum or lower level of 55. The Durbin amendment simply would not make that kind of 1-to-1 offset but would treat the Guard and Reserve the same as the Active-Duty folks. Unfortunately, the difference between the two is we cannot afford the Durbin amendment.…”