COLA Wars

National Review ^ | 20 Jan 14 | Pete Hegseth

[SkyPilot]

Why trimming military pensions irks this deficit-hawk veteran.

With a $1.1 trillion budget wending its way through Congress and likely headed for President Obama’s desk, officials in Washington are no doubt patting themselves on the back for a job well done.

Here’s who won’t be cheering the news: American veterans and military retirees and their families. Tucked away in this massive spending package is a provision that chops away at the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) raises for military retirees and family survivors, in order to save an estimated $6 billion over the next ten years.

You could argue that I, as a deficit hawk, should cheer this fiscal reform: “C’mon, Pete, you’re always going on about cutting spending, and here’s a spending cut! Why aren’t you happy?” And it’s true, spending reform is hard to come by in today’s profligate Washington, and the case could be made that we should celebrate any minor victory in that fight. But what’s galling about this specific spending cut is that it achieves so little, while breaking faith with veterans and sending a discouraging message to rank-and-file members of the military. Washington politicians can’t be bothered to make even the most minor adjustments to Social Security, Medicaid, or Medicare — but cutting back those who have served our nation honorably in uniform, or the families who have lost a loved one in combat? No problem. It’s an assault on the dignity and pride of our military personnel, for so very little in savings.

[SkyPilot]

Korb is on the direct payroll of George Soros.

The Center for American Progress was created in 2003 as a left-leaning alternative to think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute.

Korb is also being paid off by the left wing Socialist Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities, again by Soros, "whose aim is to redirect 15% of the military's budget to social programs like education, healthcare, job training, humanitarian relief, renewable energies"

Since its inception, the Center has gathered a group of high-profile senior fellows, including Lawrence Korb Also, Admiral (ret) Ryan blew every "argument" that Korb had out of the water during an appearance on PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june14/pensions_01-02.html

Notice how agitated Korb gets when he is confronted with the facts. Notice also that Korb quickly changes the subject from pensions to attacking military health care.

Korb also is spearheading pro-homosexual issues vis a vis the military, and has already caused untold damage to the military by peddling immorality by his past "victories" on this issue.

[SkyPilot]

What are these "Lavish retirement packages" of which you speak? When I joined in 1982, retirement pay for 20 years of service was 50% of final base pay, but by the time I actually retired in 2006 it was 50% of the average of my last three years' base pay, a reduction which adds up after a while.

100% correct.

[SkyPilot]

“...personnel costs are eating up half of DOD’s budget"

Once again, incorrect.

The historical average has been approximately one third, and that is what they are today.

[xzins]

[blueunicorn6]

You can call me one, but your writing proves that you’re one.

[xzins]

Korb notes that when most vets joined, these lavish retirement packages were not in existence

Korb is either uninformed or lying.

The 50% at 20 years was the rule in 1970 when I first enlisted. And it had been ongoing for many years before that.

I remember when leaving to go to college the talk I got from the reenlistment NCO who pointed out the retirement, the health coverage, the education.

Korb is nuts....there are very few "when most vets joined" who predate me. And I KNOW what it was then.

[xzins]

I can’t believe they complain about the personnel costs.

It’s like saying “We’re complaining that we have to have soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. We’d be much better off without them!”