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

Congress Continues To Avoid Ex-Spouse Law Changes

Has there been any updated information on changes to the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act?

I was married 10 years to the day to my former spouse who, through poor writing of our divorce decree, receives 25 percent of my retired pay based on 23 years of service rather than the 10 years we were married.

I had a gut feeling my military counsel, a first lieutenant at the time, was not qualified to advise me on the divorce decree.

The ex-spouse has since been married twice and still is the first one in line at the bank to cash the retirement benefits without a thought to who earned it. Estimates on lawyer fees to fight this were $7000 back in '99 and I was told there was no definite chance of winning. So I filed bankruptcy upon retiring after learning I would lose a large chunk out of my retired pay.

That this law has been unfair to the soldier is obvious. I hold out no hope that our politicians ever will be fair to the military on this. We are, as we were always told in the service, disposable. Still, my patriotism does not waiver for my country and the citizens. Sure wish it could include politicians as well.

Any updates on bills supporting a change would be helpful.

ROBERT J. CUNNINGHAM
Master Sergeant, USA-Ret.

The Department of Defense has asked Congress for several years to make several substantive changes to the USFSPA, but most would apply only to future divorce settlements. Lawmakers, however, have refused to “open that can of worms,” as the law often is described on Capitol Hill. This year is no exception. Neither the House nor the Senate versions of the fiscal 2009 have provisions to amend the former spouses' protection law.

One change sought by Defense officials would mandate that future awards of retired to ex-spouses be based on a service member's rank and time served at time of divorce. This would eliminate the so-called “windfall” benefit that accrues to ex-spouses from post-divorce promotions and longevity pay increases earned before service members actually retire. – Tom Philpott

Earlier Retirement, Certain Reservists

Pretty bold move by our Congress to exclude from its provision to lower age 60 reserve retirement, based on wartime deployment, those reservists who stepped up in the beginning [after 9-11] to defend our country.

Not to make this bill retroactive for them is a kick in the teeth to all reservists who were mobilized and then volunteered to support the war effort by staying on orders.

This bill is a huge political smoke screen to butter their own bread by pretending they're doing something for the reserve community. I say we vote them out and get folks up there who appreciate what the reserve community is really doing.

CHUCK KING
Master Sergeant, USAFR
Walton Beach, Fla.

Indemnity Allowance

Reference a letter in a recent Military Forum from a reader who stated that her husband died in 2000. She was awarded VA Dependency and Indemnity Compensation but Survivor Benefit Plan payments were denied and SBP premiums were returned to her.

In commenting, you indicated that effective Oct. 1, 2008, survivors affected by the DIC-SBP offset would begin receiving a $50 a month indemnity allowance.

My situation is similar. My husband died in 1985. I was approved for DIC and my SBP coverage was stopped and the premium returned.

My questions are: Will I receive this allowance automatically? If not who should I contact to ensure I'm considered for this allowance?

PATRICIA A. MORROW
Warner Robbins, Ga.

The indemnity allowance will begin automatically and will be paid to most surviving spouses whose DIC-SBP offset is larger than the $50 allowance. Excluded are survivors of service members who died on active duty. The impact of the offset on them does not change. Survivors of service members who, at the time of death, were receiving retired pay or were in "gray area" Reserve retirees will benefit. The allowance is to rise every year by $10 until it levels out at $100 a month after September 2013. – T. P.

GI Bill Deficiencies

I am a former Marine who spent five years on active service. I was honorably discharged and am starting Weber State University here in Ogden. There are a lot of flaws with the GI bill the way it stands right now.

I put in a request for advanced funds to help pay for my books and my first month tuition. I was told it had to be on the 30-day mark before classes started. I called on the 29th day and was denied.

I am attending school fulltime but still must work two jobs to be able to pay for school, even with the Montgomery GI Bill. Otherwise, I don't have money for books, tuitions, supplies and all the necessities.

Improvements to the GI bill would encourage more veterans to use their benefits and further their education. If we can put our lives on the line for our country then why can't the country say thank you by helping those who did.

Raising taxes for the wealthy seems timely since all we have been doing in the recent past is making the rich richer and the poor poorer. I am in the poor category and falling more and more behind. I cannot get caught up without furthering my education and it is difficult.

This new GI bill needs to be passed. By the way, most veterans I know work jobs where they don't even get Veterans' Day off.

JACOB "PREACH" DANT
Ogden, Utah

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.

How do you feel about these issues?
Let your public officials know.