Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Budget Battle: Democrats Block Amendment to Restore Military Retirement Benefits for Wounded Warriors

Posted by   + Show Post


Apparently Congress failing to make sure military death benefits for families of soldiers killed overseas would be paid out during the government shut wasn't a big enough disgrace for lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Here we are two months later and Democrats have blocked an amendment that would restore $6 billion in cuts to military retirement pensions over the next 10 years.

A final effort by Senate Republicans to halt cuts to pensions of military retirees failed late Tuesday, after Democrats blocked an amendment to the controversial budget bill.

The two-year budget agreement, which cleared a key test vote earlier in the day, was expected to get a final vote no later than Wednesday.

Ahead of the final vote, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., tried unsuccessfully to use a parliamentary tactic to force a vote on the amendment, which he wrote to undo the cuts for military retirees.

Think we don't have the money to offset the $6 billion? Think again. Apparently illegal immigrants collecting IRS tax money is more important than making sure our veterans are taken care of after voluntarily putting their lives on the line for our country.


Sessions wanted to instead eliminate an estimated $4.2 billion in annual spending by reining in an IRS credit that illegal immigrants have claimed.

He and fellow senators argued the bill unfairly sticks veterans and other military retirees with the cost of new spending.

β€œIt’s not correct, and it should not happen,” Sessions said on the floor.

"By blocking my amendment, they voted to cut pensions for wounded warriors," he said afterwards. "Senators in this chamber have many valid ideas for replacing these pension cuts, including my proposal to close the tax welfare loophole for illegal filers, and all deserved a fair and open hearing. But they were denied.”


Not to mention, yesterday Republican Senator Tom Coburn released his annual Waste Book detailing billions of dollars spent on things like studying romance novels, customized crystal stem wear, buying Facebook "likes" and other egregious abuses.

Last night on The Kelly File, Concerned Veterans for America CEO Pete Hegseth and Dr. Vivian Greentree explained that these benefits are actually disability payments for wounded soldiers who have to leave service early due to devastating injuries while serving in the field.



As usual, Capitol Hill doesn't have its priorities straight.

source

by on Dec. 19, 2013 at 9:01 AM
Replies (21-30):
sweet-a-kins
by Emerald Member on Dec. 19, 2013 at 1:41 PM

 WHA you mean REPUBLICANS VOTED and CAMPAIGNED to cut these benefits and ALSO voted for this budget without the amendment in it

ya don't say

Guess this will not make it to the commercial they are planning for the 2014 elections

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/18/news/economy/military-pension-budget/index.html?hpt=po_c1

But Washington leaders, and House Republicans, in particular, are worried about the cost of military retiree benefits.

In 2012, the Pentagon spent $52.4 billion on 2.3 million military retirees and survivors. The cost is expected to rise over the next few decades, according to the Department of Defense Office of the Actuary.

House budget chief Rep. Paul Ryan's website states that military retirement "provides an exceptionally generous benefit, often providing 40 years of pension payments in return for 20 years of service," in an explainer on why benefits should be trimmed.

"Current levels of military compensation are incompatible with the overall demands on the defense budget," according to a House Committee on the Budget Report.

Military groups say they're open to reforms, but they'd like such changes to go through a review process to avoid anything that hurts recruitment and retention. To top of page

 

LoveMyBoyK
by Ruby Member on Dec. 19, 2013 at 1:50 PM

 

Quoting sweet-a-kins:

 WHA you mean REPUBLICANS VOTED and CAMPAIGNED to cut these benefits and ALSO voted for this budget without the amendment in it

ya don't say

Guess this will not make it to the commercial they are planning for the 2014 elections

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/18/news/economy/military-pension-budget/index.html?hpt=po_c1

But Washington leaders, and House Republicans, in particular, are worried about the cost of military retiree benefits.

In 2012, the Pentagon spent $52.4 billion on 2.3 million military retirees and survivors. The cost is expected to rise over the next few decades, according to the Department of Defense Office of the Actuary.

House budget chief Rep. Paul Ryan's website states that military retirement "provides an exceptionally generous benefit, often providing 40 years of pension payments in return for 20 years of service," in an explainer on why benefits should be trimmed.

"Current levels of military compensation are incompatible with the overall demands on the defense budget," according to a House Committee on the Budget Report.

Military groups say they're open to reforms, but they'd like such changes to go through a review process to avoid anything that hurts recruitment and retention. To top of page

 

 

WHA you mean there are Republicans in this thread who are not just parotting party line, as some of you like to scream they all do???? 

\




"Rule of thumb is if it lets you carry it in a purse, it's not a dog; it's a proximity alarm that refuses to be housebroken." -- Cracked.com

Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on Dec. 19, 2013 at 1:57 PM
1 mom liked this
I could puke.

Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.

And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Sisteract
by Whoopie on Dec. 19, 2013 at 2:04 PM
1 mom liked this

Unfortunately, this is happening to people all over the place-

Cities going bankrupt and pensions gone.

He'll stay in because he has a job- many others do not.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.

Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.

And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING


jaxTheMomm
by Platinum Member on Dec. 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM

Don't fret yet - it looks like folks are trying to work on this.

However, it does seem to be a problem that needs to be fixed.  You can read more about the justification for this on the House Committee on the Budget site:

http://budget.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364048

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.

Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.

And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING


candlegal
by Judy on Dec. 19, 2013 at 4:16 PM

This is all pretty disgusting.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.

Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.

And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING


Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on Dec. 19, 2013 at 4:31 PM
Why should he stay in? Retirement is one of the main reasons he has re-enlisted and now that is Crap. BAH is being reduced in some areas. COLA is about to be done away with. Insurance is getting cut back on as well and my son's therapy is in jeopardy. The military was to be a career not a job and what good is a job if you can't afford to live on what you make? Because that is what it is coming down to... Slowly

Quoting Sisteract:

Unfortunately, this is happening to people all over the place-

Cities going bankrupt and pensions gone.

He'll stay in because he has a job- many others do not.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.



Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.



And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
candlegal
by Judy on Dec. 19, 2013 at 4:35 PM

I can't think of a single reason anyone would make a career out of the military today.   They used to be respected, not anymore.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: Why should he stay in? Retirement is one of the main reasons he has re-enlisted and now that is Crap. BAH is being reduced in some areas. COLA is about to be done away with. Insurance is getting cut back on as well and my son's therapy is in jeopardy. The military was to be a career not a job and what good is a job if you can't afford to live on what you make? Because that is what it is coming down to... Slowly

Quoting Sisteract:

Unfortunately, this is happening to people all over the place-

Cities going bankrupt and pensions gone.

He'll stay in because he has a job- many others do not.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.



Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.



And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING



Sisteract
by Whoopie on Dec. 19, 2013 at 4:36 PM

GL to your hubs-

I know many educated, skilled folks who have lost jobs.

Today I am happy because my 23 yo son who graduated from college in June and who was employed in a paid intership for 4 mos, has found a FT job, in a neighboring town, in his field, with benefits and a living wage.

Yahoo- 2 down and no more to go.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: Why should he stay in? Retirement is one of the main reasons he has re-enlisted and now that is Crap. BAH is being reduced in some areas. COLA is about to be done away with. Insurance is getting cut back on as well and my son's therapy is in jeopardy. The military was to be a career not a job and what good is a job if you can't afford to live on what you make? Because that is what it is coming down to... Slowly

Quoting Sisteract:

Unfortunately, this is happening to people all over the place-

Cities going bankrupt and pensions gone.

He'll stay in because he has a job- many others do not.

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.



Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.



And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING



Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on Dec. 19, 2013 at 4:37 PM
I know what it says and it pisses me off beyond belief that military pay and benefits is the first thing on the chopping block. There are so many other areas that can be cut back on to save money. So many other people who are OVERpaid (like Congress) who are never even considered on the list of "let's cut their pay"...

WHY is it always the military that gets fucked over?


Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Don't fret yet - it looks like folks are trying to work on this.

However, it does seem to be a problem that needs to be fixed.  You can read more about the justification for this on the House Committee on the Budget site:

http://budget.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364048

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley: I could puke.



Both my father and father in law will be losing retiree benefits because of this.



And why the hell should my husband stay in when the benefits guaranteed by the contract he signed 9 years ago means apparently NOTHING


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured