|
|
Pay reform caught in crossfire between Congress, president
PROSPECTS CONTINUE to dim for disabled military retirees seeking to ease or end the ban on concurrent receipt of full retirement pay and VA disability compensation. Besides now-familiar hurdles-- the multibillion-dollar price tag, the threat of a presidential veto, a calculated delay in congressional action until after Nov. 5 elections--retirees can add one more. That's the fear inside the House and Senate armed services committees that only a quick retreat on concurrent receipt will keep these committees from a permanent loss of power. Many lawmakers facing re-election will beat drums on behalf of disabled retirees until the polls close. After that, the armed services committees likely will have a new, even higher priority: preserving their own relevance. To do that, they need to see a defense authorization bill passed this year, with or without a provision to raise the pay of retirees with disabilities. The authorization bill is hung up, over the issue of concurrent receipt, in a House-Senate conference committee. The Bush administration threatens a veto if conferees approve even the more modest House plan to phase in full retirement pay over five years and only for those 60 percent disabled or higher. Before Congress recessed for elections, Republican-led conferees in the House refused to negotiate with Senate colleagues. They didn't want Bush to have to veto a bill over benefits for disabled retirees, particularly as U.S. forces prepare for war in Iraq and many key elections are at stake. Bush has signed a $355 billion defense appropriations bill, which doesn't mention concurrent receipt. If a few more lines are added to another bill--to authorize a targeted military pay raise in January and renew service bonus authorities--the military could run in 2003 without a defense authorization bill. It's a political nightmare for the armed services committees. If no authorization bill is voted, the enormous power of the appropriations committees will be clarified and the armed services committees would be seen as ineffectual this year and perhaps unnecessary long range. For the past half century, only the Department of Defense has been required by law to have both an annual authorization and annual appropriation bill. Typically, the authorization bill is approved first, giving legal existence to specific programs. The appropriators then set funding levels for programs. At one time, the authorization bill also set ceilings on program spending. That authority began to slip a decade ago. The armed services committee chairmen just stopped challenging appropriations in excess of authorization. Appropriators took advantage, gaining more power. When Congress reconvenes Nov. 12 for a lame-duck session, the armed services committees will try to reach a compromise on concurrent receipt, one acceptable to the White House. If they can't, the issue might be dropped entirely to get an authorization bill passed. Democrats are ready to blame Bush and his veto threat. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Oct. 25 that House Republicans had failed to endorse either the House or Senate concurrent-receipt plan. Levin said he is committed to completing a defense bill this year, but gave no assurance, in the face of White House opposition, that a concurrent-receipt provision would survive. "There is simply too much legislation critical to our national security in this [authorization] bill, including important legislation concerning pay and benefits for our troops, for Congress not to complete action on it," Levin said. An official who follows concurrent receipt closely said the odds of success are longer for retirees than they have been for months. Yet he raised two possibilities. House and Senate conferees could remove concurrent receipt from the defense bill and send it forward as stand-alone legislation. Bush could veto the new bill without jeopardizing other defense programs. Second, House-Senate conferees could agree to a sharply reduced concurrent-receipt plan, one that President Bush might accept. An official said it might be aimed only at retired enlisted members, given their modest annuities, and apply to injuries or illnesses linked directly to incidents of service, perhaps combat only, and no tie to aging. Victory this year for even a small population of disabled retirees would be a surprise. TOM PHILPOTT is a syndicated columnist. Send questions or comments to Military Update, Box 1230, Centreville, Va. 20122-8230, or e-mail milupdate@aol.com. Date published: Sun, 11/03/2002 |
