Military retirement under attack

[herkbum]

I thought he separated from the Air Force before 20 years anyway.

His website says he is still in the ANG.

[Rusty Pipes]

I know lots of you guys have read Tony Carr's open letter to Rep. Ryan on his John Q. Public blog… it has since been published on businessinsider.com. It looks like he is now getting a bigger stage… Tony is scheduled to appear on FoxNews tomorrow morning (Friday, 27 Dec) on Fox and Friends to discuss the retirement cuts for military members. He doesn't have a time yet, but I'll update this when I hear for those interested in watching. For those who don't know Tony, I can't think of a better guy to represent us in a forum like this.

Update: Already posted by Chuck, but it looks like 6:15 EST. They will most definitely replay it again a few more times during the 3 hr block of Fox and Friends, but if you are interested in seeing it live it will be at 6:15. Good luck, Tony… thanks for fighting for us!

Edited December 26, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[GoAround]

That is great news. Thanks for the info Rusty.

[Bender]

Somebody post a link when they find it. I can't figure out how AFN even works programming-wise...if it even makes it onto the AFN news channel here.

Thank you kindly in advance,

Mr. Bender-meister

[GoAround]

BeerMan, that's a great point. Would like to know if the "bipartisan", Paul Ryan-led budget deal included a reduction in the House and Senate retirements. I wager no.

[Rusty Pipes]

Somebody post a link when they find it. I can't figure out how AFN even works programming-wise...if it even makes it onto the AFN news channel here.

Thank you kindly in advance,

Mr. Bender-meister

I'm about as tech savvy as a sun dial, but I'm sure we can find someone who can post a link to the segment on here somehow. Maybe Chang or Liquid could even take a look to see what real Air Force leaders should look like… Tony was smart enough to trade in Stars for Harvard Law. I'm guessing he will have a much bigger impact on the system with the path he has chosen… sucks to see the AF lose yet another great leader though!

[congressman]

As a side note, I would love to see a comparison of 20+ year military retirement compensation and "one term" Congressional benefits. (in a stoplight chart because apparently people above the rank of Captain can't digest facts or details).

[Liquid]

I'm about as tech savvy as a sun dial, but I'm sure we can find someone who can post a link to the segment on here somehow. Maybe Chang or Liquid could even take a look to see what real Air Force leaders should look like Tony was smart enough to trade in Stars for Harvard Law. I'm guessing he will have a much bigger impact on the system with the path he has chosen sucks to see the AF lose yet another great leader though!

Piss off Rusty. That was an uninformed cheap shot. You don't know how I lead or what impact I have had.

I read Tony's blog and agree with most of what he says. He is intelligent, articulate and has recent AF leadership experiences that make his insights valuable. I disagree with his assertion (15 Dec blog post) that generals have let down their force by not speaking out against this bill. Senior leaders and all officers should refrain from participating in the political process and they should refrain from disparaging congress. Specifically, active duty officers must not "Allow or cause to be published in partisan political articles, letters, or endorsements signed or written by the member that solicits votes for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause." Article 88 of the UCMJ prohibits officers from using contemptuous words against congress, POTUS, SECDEF or SECAF.

When asked by congress, senior leaders should give their best military advice. According to Tony, and what I have also heard, congress did not ask CJCS or service chiefs for their advice before they proposed cutting retirement benefits. Retired Lt Cols like Tony are much more effective veteran advocates in the political process than generals can be. Hopefully Tony's efforts will result in this disturbing reduction in retirement benefits being removed from the current budget law. He makes very good arguments for why our civilian leadership should not break faith with the brave and selfless military members who serve this nation so well. My guess is that congress will reinstate the COLA increases early next year, long before the cuts impact retirees.

edit: Corrected leaving out "not" before "speaking out".

Edited December 27, 2013 by Liquid

[Fuzz]

What a bullshit response, why do we have to ask the dems, why didn't you and your colleagues make the change in the house? And also throw the bullshit flag on the tax increase but hey at least we know where you stand; hopefully that's only the case for another couple months till you get to join the rest of the unemployed.

Why did we not cut tax exemptions for illegals? Ask the dems. And the tea party who would have called that a tax increase.

[herkbum]

" Article 88 of the UCMJ prohibits officers from using contemptuous words against congress, POTUS, SECDEF or SECAF. "

Are you saying that we should not write letters to our elected officials? Because I do not believe anyone here has used "contemptuous words".

[herkbum]

Ok C-Man, I'll bite. I think your logic is flawed, and that your delivery is dishonest at best. I went back and corrected my previous post to make a better comparison. Also here is the text of the Wikipedia article that you suggested:

1) Active Duty military pensions are only available after 20+ years of military service. Using your Wikipedia source, Congressmen are eligible for pensions after as little as 5 years and are "vested" after that time. There is no option for an Active Duty military person to receive a pension prior to 20 years of service, unless it is a force shaping measure.

2) Are current members already "vested" in the Congressional system impacted by the civilian system changes? Your statement implies that they are not.

Why not apply those changes to members of Congress who have been "serving" the United States for the last 20+ years? Do you think that would be unfair? Disingenuous? Do you believe in leading by example? So is it ok for Congress to keep their current benefits for their service but not for members of the military?

3) Qualified service members losing a portion of their earned compensation AFTER signing on the dotted line is "an unfortunate fact" ? And its not your fault its the Democrat's fault or the Tea party? Is it ok for me to blame someone else for not accomplishing my job? "Sorry boss they bombed the target, but if I had a better widget this wouldn't have happened, but it was the best I could do." These are what we in the military call excuses.

Did you read Carr's article? We're not stupid. At least take ownership of your actions. Own your decisions. This goes for everyone in Washington.

We're living the Sequester. We get it. There is no money. We are doing fewer and fewer of the things that make this job cool. But don't piss on us, tell us it's raining, and then tell us its somebody else's fault when you (because you're allegedly a congressman) voted for it.

Cheers,

BeerMan

I would also like to add that I would love to have the compensation, pension, and work schedule of Congress.

[congressman]

Gotcha man. For the record I have been pushing for military members to be vested similar to how other federal employees are before 20 years. And no, current members on FERS are not affected nor are other federal employees including guard technicians. In the budget (the house republican budget that we have passed for the last three years) we have proposed and voted for a significant increase in contributions by all federal employees, current and future. And we have rejected our own COLAS for at least the last three years but I think it's been like 5. I don't expect congress to get a COLA for the next few at least. In fact years we voted to reverse our own COLAS proactively each of those years. One of the first votes I took was to cut our own budgets 10 percent, then we got hit also with sequester, so budgets are like 20 or 25 percent lower than my predecessor.

No federal employee has received a pay increase for at least three years, this year they will get a 1 percent increase, below inflation.

Since there are now caps on military spending, growth in pension and healthcare costs will crowd out what can be spent on readiness, etc. Sequester is dumb, was never meant to happen, but did because of a majorly divided government. This budget deal was small but will relieve sequester slightly, but most importantly prevents the further 20 billion dollar cut that was supposed to come along January first. That would have led to an even smaller force and more job losses.

I know it sucks... For all of us who have served and continue to (my hope is to make 20 as well). The worst possible outcome though is a complete collapse of our financial system. But since the changes don't take effect till 2015, my hope is we can replace the cuts to pension with cuts elsewhere. Here's to hoping.

Not gonna get drawn into an Internet argument since I do that for a living now, but just wanted to put a few points out there. Thanks for serving.

I would also like to add that I would love to have the compensation, pension, and work schedule of Congress.

That's funny, I miss my military schedule!

[Liquid]

" Article 88 of the UCMJ prohibits officers from using contemptuous words against congress, POTUS, SECDEF or SECAF. "

Are you saying that we should not write letters to our elected officials? Because I do not believe anyone here has used "contemptuous words".

No. I was referring to Tony Carr's criticism that generals have not spoken out against the bill. There is a difference between writing your congressman and publicly speaking out against a bill, and using disparaging language to attack supporters of the bill. And I never said or implied anyone used contemptuous words on this anonymous blog.

[herkbum]

Thanks to both Congressman and Liquid for answering the questions.

[congressman]

No problem. It was one of the hardest votes I've taken, and I've taken some difficult ones. I fully get how people feel, and can empathize. I recently returned from a trip to Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Liberia. Each place I visit in my official capacity reminds me how great of a country we are and how great our military is. We need to preserve that power and that's what I have been trying to do, disagreements with my recent votes aside

[Bobby]

But since the changes don't take effect till 2015, my hope is we can replace the cuts to pension with cuts elsewhere. Here's to hoping.

Sorry, but as I've been reminded so many times in my military career...hope is not a plan.

[Wendell]

No problem. It was one of the hardest votes I've taken, and I've taken some difficult ones. I fully get how people feel, and can empathize. I recently returned from a trip to Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Liberia. Each place I visit in my official capacity reminds me how great of a country we are and how great our military is. We need to preserve that power and that's what I have been trying to do, disagreements with my recent votes aside

No doubt it was a "hard" vote and the current retirement system needs to be reevaluated. Those currently serving should have been grandfathered in as promised and you sure as shit should not have changed it for those who are already retired. Nice way to thank those who served than by stealing from them to pay for the wars you (congress) sent us to fight.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Wendell

[Liquid]

Sorry, but as I've been reminded so many times in my military career...hope is not a plan.

You have the opportunity to engage with a congressman about an important issue and this is the best you come up with?

[Fuzz]

Sequester is dumb, was never meant to happen, but did because of a majorly divided government.

Yeah, it was never meant to happen but the GOP was also retarded in agreeing to military cuts when the democrats gave up nothing of value. Admit it you are over a barrel since the democrats don't care about sequestration because it doesn't really hurt their sacred cows. I'm really tired of seeing GOP members of Congress on TV crying about the sequester when they made such a shitty deal and the democrats called your bluff.

I don't expect congress to get a COLA for the next few at least.

My god, you make $174K a year and you want COLA? I know D.C. is pretty expensive area to live (grew up there) but that is 20-30K above the median income for the counties in that area. If my entire family can do it making way less than you and will be making less since you decided to take money out of my parents retirement, I'm sure you can too.

You betrayed your fellow service members when you take their earned income away ahead of the billions of dollars of waste and welfare programs (maybe you should pick up your esteemed colleague Sen. Coburn's book of government waste he just published). I get it cuts need to be made but the promise that is made to veterans should not be the first broken because you and your colleagues (GOP and Dems) can't get your act together.

[magnetfreezer]

No problem. It was one of the hardest votes I've taken, and I've taken some difficult ones. I fully get how people feel, and can empathize. I recently returned from a trip to Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Liberia. Each place I visit in my official capacity reminds me how great of a country we are and how great our military is. We need to preserve that power and that's what I have been trying to do, disagreements with my recent votes aside

Why not start cutting with entitlements? SS/Medicare is such a large portion of the budget you could cut defense to zero and still be running a deficit. Start with keying the age for benefits to average life expectancy. When my grandfather started paying into SS in the 30s, having the "safety net" age set in the 60s made sense - from http://demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html, the life expectancy was just under 60, leaving SS for those passing that age who could no longer work. Now with improvements in medicine/living conditions (not a bad thing), most live into their 70s and beyond, straining the system. Then, move toward privatizing it so it becomes less of a Ponzi scheme.

[backseatdriver]

I get it cuts need to be made but the promise that is made to veterans should not be the first broken because you and your colleagues (GOP and Dems) can't get your act together.

This.

[HU&W]

I know it sucks... For all of us who have served and continue to (my hope is to make 20 as well). The worst possible outcome though is a complete collapse of our financial system. But since the changes don't take effect till 2015, my hope is we can replace the cuts to pension with cuts elsewhere. Here's to hoping.

Thanks for the insight. I really appreciate you jumping on here to show us a little peek of the bigger picture.

For feedback, the budget deal did some damage to the relationship with troops who were planning to continue to retirement, but not as you might have expected. Sure, the loss of $100K or so over 20 years hurts a bit, but the real issue is with the betrayal of trust. Throughout the year, as recently as September, congressional leaders from both houses promised any military retirement reform would include a grandfather clause. This one didn't. If those holding the keys to our future are willing to make this small reversal, can we reasonably trust them with 20 years of our lives without fear of far greater losses?

[Spartacus]

Thanks for the insight. I really appreciate you jumping on here to show us a little peek of the bigger picture.

For feedback, the budget deal did some damage to the relationship with troops who were planning to continue to retirement, but not as you might have expected. Sure, the loss of $100K or so over 20 years hurts a bit, but the real issue is with the betrayal of trust. Throughout the year, as recently as September, congressional leaders from both houses promised any military retirement reform would include a grandfather clause. This one didn't. If those holding the keys to our future are willing to make this small reversal, can we reasonably trust them with 20 years of our lives without fear of far greater losses?

Shack!

Congressman, for us 11x types this is not good. We get our flying hours cut and even grounded in some cases due to the sequester, the airlines are hiring more, some of us are facing RIFs, AND now it looks like if we decide to stay to 20 that we should not trust in any way that we'll get the retirement that we have been told we will get. Have you seen this? http://complex.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/12/26/air_force_warns_we_could_run_out_of_pilots#sthash.7jYojEtx.dpbs To you I ask this: What has Congress and the Air Force done recently to make us think that we should stay in when it seems like you are breaking faith with us?

[Rusty Pipes]

Piss off Rusty. That was an uninformed cheap shot. You don't know how I lead or what impact I have had.

Liquid… I wasn't calling out your leadership or impact since I don't know either. I was calling out your bosses that both you and Chang seem to look up to and defend on a regular basis. If those guys had the leadership skills that Tony has (and I know it from more than just reading his blog) you wouldn't have scores of pages on this forum dedicated to how much things suck!

Its not that hard… your average crew dawg just wants to be inspired! We are desperately looking for those in leadership positions to (gasp) actually fucking lead!!! Those who try are crushed or quit. And some end up on FoxNews at 6:15 EST tomorrow morning. Guess what… it isn't Chang!

Edited December 27, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[RTB]

It was one of the hardest votes I've taken, and I've taken some difficult ones.

So why did you vote for it? I assume you were fully aware of the retirement COLA cuts when you voted. Was there no time to 'fix' that provision before it went to the senate? Like others have mentioned, so much was said in the past year about how current retirees and currently serving personnel would be grandfathered in any new plan that I'm pretty surprised this provision was allowed to move forward without any debate or challenges. Very disappointing. And although small in scope, the fact that it happened at all is an ominous sign that congress' attitude towards taking from those that serve is now fully on the table.