This article was exclusively provided to the New York Analysis by Lt. Col. Don Zapsic, (ret.)
The selectively budget-minded, clarion call of the Obama-Era federal government once again found its miserly mark in the revamping of the military retirement system. Reminiscent of the hard-drinking, good-time Charlie who blows much of his paycheck only to return home announcing to wife and children that oatmeal, potatoes and beans are back on the menu at least until next payday. Grounded much in former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s strategy of “never letting a good crisis go to waste,” the feds declared that maintaining the present military retirement system was “unsustainable.” Never mind the fact that the federal government has been printing and spending money like a drunken sailor on shore leave. Amassing unconscionable national debt while taxing the middle class into financial oblivion.
Upon establishing a narrative that the military pension system (branded as the “Legacy Plan”) was identified as a threat to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the “Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Committee” was commissioned in FY 2013 to address the pension “solvency crisis.” And what exactly does constitute a financial crisis at the federal government level? It is not so much about the expense involved as it is about the amount wasted leading up to what is legitimately needed. What is often lost in translation is proper consideration of the added value associated with money spent. A dollar invested in national defense goes infinitely further than money squandered on warehousing and resettling illegal immigrant populations at American taxpayer expense in direct contradiction to the “rule of law.” It is all really just a matter of context. The military pension system only becomes unviable when Department of Defense funds are targeted to defray astronomical costs associated with unfunded social programs and corresponding entitlements.
The duly-appointed FY 2013 commission presented its final report to President Obama and the Congress of the United States on January 29, 2015. The report contained 15 recommendations including the inception of the Blended Retirement System (BRS); a watered-down version of the traditional pension plan. A “rob Peter-to-pay-Paul” approach funded from a 10% downgrade in retirement pay at 20 years of military service (50% to 40%) and a subsequent reduction in the yearly multiplier (2.5 to 2.0%) used to calculate credited service thereafter. Under BRS, it now takes 25 years of service to attain the same 50% retirement compensation rate afforded by 20 years of service under the Legacy Plan. In all fairness, BRS does provide a Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) and continuation pay (a one-time offering at the 12-year anniversary mark equaling 2.5 times one month of basic pay). A third component of BRS is a retirement annuity paid out on a monthly basis at 40% of basic pay.
The DoD markets the Blended Retirement System as comparative to civilian-based 401K plans. The key consideration to keep in mind is that the federal government is saving 10% on the costs of funding the newly-acquired military pension system. A 10% savings for the government generates a comparable loss for retirees. It is a zero-sum game where there are winners and losers contrary to what the feds would like service members to believe. The DoD There are no tadalafil tablets in india studies showing the safety of the product. Basics of Sperm Count Sperm production is cheap levitra generic an important factor in the life of men. Generally speaking, it can only be an inflammation with viagra fast no sign of infection. Neither will online cialis sale showing sexual aggression towards the opposite sex. automatically contributes 1% of basic pay to a service member’s Thrift Savings Plan account while matching up to an additional 4% of member contributions. Reaching the highest TSP participation level is a tall order for junior enlisted families who often can’t make ends as it is. Consider that in 2013, “$104 million worth of food stamps were used at military commissaries (“Food Stamp Use among Military Arises Again by JenniferLiberto@jenliberto”). If an article from 2013 seems a little outdated, consider that it was the last year that the USDA shared such information with the Department of Defense for undisclosed reasons.
Contrary to how much self-congratulation that the federal government may bestow upon itself for creating the BRS at the expense of those it purports to help, it is just another slap in the face to those who have been fighting our nation’s wars since 2001 in the aftermath of 9/11. Promising a reduced monthly annuity upon retirement; a matching five-percent TSP contribution; and taxable continuation pay at the 12-year mark for another four-year commitment is an insult to anyone astute enough to do the math. While Napoleon had a point when he said, “Men will die for medals,” no one is going to linger in a high-risk environment like the military just to pick up some loose change hoping that they are not horribly burned, blinded, maimed or killed first.
While it is true that the hollowed-out BRS plan initiated in 2018 is much better than many private-sector retirement plans, “military life is not civilian life.” All things being equal, the traditional military retirement plan should have been upgraded considering how often service members are put in harm’s way. If you doubt me on this, consider that in July of 2019, an Army Green Beret Sergeant Major was killed in Afghanistan by small arms fire. It was his “seventh” deployment there. On another front addressing food shortages among junior enlisted families unable to participate in recently-added Thrift Savings Program, consider that, “the Department of Defense’s Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance or FSSA- the program designed and funded by the DoD to keep military families from having to use food banks- rejected 96.6% of all applicants (The DoD Should Reform Its Food Assistance Program, Not Eliminate It).” Michelle Villareal Zook, Feb. 05, 2015.
Our nation’s warriors by-and-large would much rather be heroes to their spouses and children than community celebrities. A service member’s life is about much more than putting boots on the ground in hostile places. It is just as much about putting good shoes that properly fit on their children’s feet. Or for that matter being able to put a little finance behind the romance of cherishing one’s spouse. Then there is the federal government to consider. Both the Senate and House Armed Services Committees need to understand that they cannot continue repackaging old concepts and relabeling them in attempts to fool both the American public and service members at-large. It is great to thank military members for their service and even better to properly pay them for that very service. Just like anyone else, they are trying to earn a living while making better and safer for others who depend upon them.
Illustration: Pixabay