The NDAA 2011 (H.R. 5136) or National Defense Authorization Act for 2011 has been put on hold due to the most recent elections. While I'm sure your wondering what I am referring to with bill numbers and abbreviations, the National Defense Authorization Act decides and dictates the current designated spending for the military. Unfortunately, this year's agenda is looking to cut a budget that is already shoestring thin, by either reducing military size, military special pay, or both. The newly elected politician results are in, but the NDAA 2011 undecided results aren't looking very promising.
This year, 2010,has been a major charade and debacle, in regards to military pay raises and military spending. The government is looking to cut corners and apparently the military is the place to go. There are three major concerns that our sailors, soldiers and airmen should be looking at within the 2011 NDAA. The first is whether the Senate will approve the discriminatory and minimal pay raise for service members. 1.4% proposed by the Senate and President, or 1.9% proposed by the House; obviously they are both repugnant, but, hey, a raise is a raise.
The other two critical proposals on the 2011 NDAA are whether or not to cut our military forces, or cut the existing military pay, or both. While both of these proposals are redundant, the government is going to do what they have to do to save money, regardless of its hardship impacts.
Included in pay cuts are the special duty allowances for military service members. These include eliminating tax free war zone pay, hazardous duty pay, special duty pay, and family leave and separation pay. By eliminating these pays, hardships and cohesion breaks will subtly set in. Obviously, there is overspending in all of our branches of the service, but the notion is that the military is making more across the board than the allowable ECI-Employment Cost Index. Okay, I have to be honest about this index, someone needs to explain to me why they are willing to cut pay,cut troops, and downsize in general for financial reasons, but in return higher on GSA employees and contractors to make on average almost 3 times the same amount of money of the man they just discharged, while offering an over-generous benefits package. This game of truth or consequences has too many hardships at risk, and the negative outcome will sadly discourage faith in America but its people.
While our economy is struggling, with bolstered media reports of an assumed financial recovery, cutting military pay and reducing our military size is an unfortunate and ignorant way to stay the crisis. If the government decides to downsize military forces, we will see a surge in the employment market, which will re-create our unemployment conundrum. With employment reduction comes individuals looking for alternative work. Apparently, we as a country can not handle the surging unemployment market, just think what a major military overhaul will produce. Most assuredly unemployment lines will continue to wind around the local and state employment security commission offices.
Reducing military size also puts America in a very vulnerable state. Technically we are still at war. Not only will this proposal add additional pressure onto a morale-deprived and weakened cohesive unit, but it will also require many to perform additional duties that they may be unprepared or uneducated to take on. It then becomes a burden of a weakened military to perform at 100% with only 75% staffing. Unquestionable problems are bound to inundate our ranks.
After consideration of military reduction has played out, the other recommendation is to reduce or stop special duty pay. To be honest, speaking as a sailor in the United States Navy, this will most assuredly cause a hardship. Special duty pays include such pays as family leave and separation, combat pay, tax-free war zone pay, SD AP for recruiters, and other additional incentive pays which specific sailors and soldiers work hard to attain, by additional education and taking on collateral duties. To reduce or remove these special payments will create a cohesion hardship, financial hardship, and morale hardship. It is through special pays that sailors and soldiers receive recognition for hard work and dedication to their country.
While this year's pay raises are criminally defunct, what should be a majority concern is the reduction in troops, reduction in pay or both. Our House and Senate still haven't come forth with a resolution to budget cuts in the military. Although I am sure that it will be soon, we as the people must really consider what these budget cuts will mean to both the military family and the civilian economy. Limited troops and limited pay can quite possibly spin our financial crisis right back to where it started, when we were sure that it was coming to an end.
http://militaryadvantage.military.com/2010/10/congressional-politics-leaves-military-pay-hanging/
http://militaryadvantage.military.com/2010/10/2011-military-pay-debate/?wh=benefits
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR05136:@@@J
As the spouse of a military member this issue is concerning our family as well. Currently considering my husband's rate and rank as a second class petty officer, our pay is just enough to allow our family of four to pay the bills and put food on the table. We are very concerned with the potential pay cut, and I completely agree with your blog. If the military were to further tighten it's belt on funding on the military community, I would be amazed if we all didn't fall back into the financial crisis again. This is definitely a topic people should be concerned about. Great job at pointing out the key points and focus of your argument. I found it very effective!
ReplyDeleteLSTD 1243-103 Comp II Blog – Unit One extra credit response to Joe Lewis' blog
ReplyDeleteJoe,
All I can say is WOW! As the folks in my Comp I class are aware, I pretty much do whatever I can to avoid the media. Of course, the downfall to that way of thinking is issues like these escape my attention.
My father spent 20 years serving this country in the U.S. Air Force, as did his father and all but one of his brothers. I also have the pleasure of working with quite a few retired military people in my current job, two of whom served in Vietnam.
While I understand the U.S. is in financial crisis, what I cannot understand is why the government (on both the state and federal level) always seems to target budget cuts in areas where there is the greatest need. I am both sickened and saddened that this proposition is on the table. I am sure there are concerns about cutting human service programs, but there has to be another way to make up the shortages without cutting funding to the military.
Unfortunately, we see more and more of these kinds of actions: hurting those that are actually in positions to help people versus cutting wasteful spending and legislative perks. The only real improvement I have seen (in the treatment of our service members) over the course of U.S. history is the American peoples' view of the military. Unlike Vietnam, our citizens fully support our troops today, if not the people who risk those troops' lives in seemingly senseless wars.
Thank you for writing about this topic. I have enjoyed blogging because of the passion my classmates' exhibit. They write about things that normally would pass by me because of my aversion to all media outlets. Great job! Your blogged flowed well, included just the right about of detail and expressed your zeal.
Joe,
ReplyDeleteAs I read your blog about the pending decision of military pay cuts I’m angered by the ignorance of the government. When I was married, my husband was a sailor in the U.S.Navy. I don’t remember him ever making more money than the allowable EIC. In fact, I remember struggling just to make ends meet. That being said, it makes no sense to me to discharge a soldier but then hire outside contractors at greater cost. I thought the whole point was to save money. It brings me back to our assignment on “Good Job”. I still say, “What is wrong with saying, ‘good job,’ once in a while,” whether verbal or in the form of pay. It’s as if the government is saying, “bad job” when they decide to take away special pays and/or military personnel, but then turn around and hire someone else to do the same job. I found your blog very informative and well written. Every point was very convincing even if I was in complete agreement with you from the moment I began to read.