Readers of Tom Philpott’s Military Update column sound off.

Recomputing Retired Pay: One More Indulgence   

I commend the fine article on how active duty pay raises and retiree cost-of-living adjustments create disparities in retired pay based year retired. But where on earth would our government find money to “recompute” retired pay amounts, as the retiree quoted in the article suggests?

We no longer have a strong export trade. Our nation has followed unsound politics, and leaders who lack foresight, as when we entered into the one-sided North American Fair Trade Agreement.

So where would money come from to make costly retired pay adjustments?  Will the printing presses just run, driving up our national debt?  We already owe our souls to the Chinese. Does debt not matter any more? Our Congress and president spend money like its water dripping from an everlasting bucket.

When the chickens come home to roost, what will our citizens do? Beg elected officials to bail us out, like we’re doing with the housing situation? Who takes responsibility? No one! Not even people who have borrowed money when they knew they were living beyond their means.

Someday the whole ball of wax will melt. We can only hope the effect on social security and government pensions won’t cause heartaches.

For now, politicians behave as though this train ride will never end. Spend, spend and keep on spending.

JOSEPH S. HILL
Chief Petty Officer, USN-Ret.
Cookeville, Tenn.

Interesting article on retired pay differences.

You mention the effect on retired pay during those years when retirees saw two COLA increases and the one-percent kicker. What you don't mention is that they were pushed through the Congress by Rep. L. Mendel Rivers (D-S.C.) from the Charleston area.

Most folks have forgotten this gent who was fond of imbibing at chief's clubs.  As one who has long benefited from his actions, I'll never forget him.

I retired in 1974.

E. H. CANADA
Master Chief Personnelman, USN-Ret.
Via e-mail

There is no mention made of three years in the 1990s that older military retirees did not receive a COLA. No mention of lost dental, hearing and eye care. No mention of retirees having to pay out-of-pocket costs for promised lifetime medical care.

The lost COLAs and benefits now denied directly impacted the income and standard of living for older, lower-paid retirees who had the benefits promised to them, earned them and then had them taken away.

Older military retirees, spouses and surviving spouses have been hurt financially for 20 or more years. They now suffer monetary hardships due to lies told to them by agents of the federal government and actions of heartless, uncaring congresses and presidents

TIM FOREHAND
USMC-Ret.
Via e-mail

The only year military retirees did not receive a COLA over the last 40 years was 1985.  The COLA scheduled to take effect Dec. 1 that year was blocked by Congress.

Also, in 1983, military retirees 62 and older received a full COLA of 3.9 percent but younger retirees saw their COLA capped at 3.3 percent.

In the 1990s, congressional fiddling with COLAs involved delays rather than missed payments.  A COLA that was to take effect Dec. 1, 1993, was delayed three months, to March of the following year.  This happened again in 1994 and in 1995. -- Tom Philpott

WEBB GI BILL

About time!

As a 39-year veteran, I wish we had the benefits the troops have now. If the Department of Defense would quit sending these guys back to war after only a short time home, maybe they wouldn’t have a retention problem.

THOMAS RUSSO
Via e-mail

Read more about the Webb GI Bill.

SBP OPEN SEASON

Many of we older retiree's opted out of the Survivor’s Benefit Plan because of the offset that occurred for surviving spouses at age 62.

Is there any chance that we could get back in now that the offset has been done away with?

CHUCK COFTY
Major, USMC-Ret.
Charlotte, N.C.

There was a chance but it has passed.  The same law that directed phase out of the age-62 offset also mandated that retirees who had declined SBP coverage when they retired be given a new opportunity.  The resulting year-long “open season” for late SBP enrollment began Oct. 1, 2005, and ran through Sept. 30, 2006.

Retirees who had previously declined SBP coverage enroll were able to enroll during that year on condition they repay all back premiums plus interest. Repayment had to be made in a lump sum or in 24 equal installments. No other open season is planned. – T.P.

NO COMPARISON

Something is wrong when defense policymakers, and even veteran service organizations, compare military service and health benefits to no-risk civilian occupations and their benefits.

Military retiree benefits should match promises made at the time of induction and re-enlistment. To propose changes in their benefit to fit budget constraints, due to demand of war, combat casualty care and force readiness, is illogical. They should never be on the same radarscope.

Most career military people serve honorably for 20 to 30 years and sacrifice the best and most productive years of their lives. This often leads to fragmented family circumstances (divorces) and service-connected disabilities. Rep. [John] McHugh, DoD and the VSOs should all be on the same playing field, and looking at the following factors, when proposing TRICAREE fee increases for retirees.

First, TRICARE should be a life-long, cost free program, as promised.

Second, retirees should not have their pay offset to accommodate service-connected disabilities, which often preclude gainful employment.

Third, we must repeal forever the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (10 U.S.C. 1408). This reprehensible law allows non-combatant ex-spouses to receive windfall rewards without risk or sacrifice.

Finally, we must all recognize that freedom is not free. 

TERRY R. HOUSLEY
USAF-Ret.

Letters may be edited for clarity or length.  Write to Military Forum, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville, VA  20120-1111, send e-mail to militaryforum@aol.com or visit www.militaryupdate.com.