I would like to point out also that in the existing bill, we have added 6 months after demobilization in a transition to civilian life. They are entitled to these same benefits. It isn't as if we drop them the day they walk out of the gate, having served with distinction in his or her service on active duty. I think we are framing this debate correctly. We have to look at the associated costs with this permanent entitlement program which is being proposed. Bear in mind, particularly to my colleagues who have had experience in the military themselves, we are narrowing the gap between the benefits for reservists and guardsmen and those who commit to enlistment for 5 years or those who aspire to be careerists for 20-plus years. Pretty soon people are going to say, why should I become a regular member of the U.S. Army and sign up for commitments of many years when I can stay in the Reserve and just about get all the same benefits that a regular gets? Once we start that breakdown, I dare say, my dear friends, we will have a lot of difficulty recruiting for the Active Forces and much less difficulty recruiting for the Reserve and the Guard.
On the recordJune 2, 2004
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing benefits for military personnel and the implications of proposed entitlement programs.
Share
More from Mark Warner
Jul 29, 2026
This arrangement presents a serious risk to market integrity, creates a clear and unacceptable pathway for corruption, and undermines public confidence in the fair dissemination of market-moving government information — a crucial factor in…
Jul 22, 2026
I've known Jay for a long time. I like Jay. I worked well with him when he was at the SEC. But I was bitterly disappointed by his performance in front of my committee.
Jul 17, 2026
This is all just a prelude to interfere in our midterms — don’t fall for it.
Aug 6, 2026
In order to meet U.S. and global energy demands, we need to advance the next generation of nuclear energy technology.





