Shows & Panels
Shows & Panels
- The 2014 Big Picture on Cyber Security
- AFCEA Answers
- American Readiness: Renewable Power and Efficiency Technologies
- Ask the CIO
- Building the Hybrid Cloud
- Connected Government: How to Build and Procure Network Services for the Future
- Continuing Diagnostics and Mitigation: Discussion of Progress and Next Steps
- Delivering the Digital Government Mission
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal News Radio's National Cyber Security Awareness Month Special Panel Discussion
- Federal Tech Talk
- The Future of Government Data Centers
- The Future of IT: How CIOs Can Enable the Service-Oriented Enterprise
- Government Perspectives on Mobility and the Cloud
- The Intersection: Where Technology Meets Transformation
- Maximizing ROI Through Data Center Consolidation
- Mitigating Insider Threats in Virtual & Cloud Environments
- Modern Mission Critical Series
- The New Generation of Database
- Reimagining the Next Generation of Government
- Targeting Advanced Threats: Proven Methods from Detection through Remediation
- Transformative Technology: Desktop Virtualization in Government
- The Truth About IT Opex and Software Defined Networking
- Air Traffic Management Transformation Report
- Cloud First Report
- General Dynamics IT Enterprise Center
- Gov Cloud Minute
- Government in Technology Series
- Homeland Security Cybersecurity Market Report
- National Cybersecurity Awareness Month
- Technology Insights
- The Cyber Security Report
- The Next Generation Cyber Security Experts
Shows & Panels
Senators urge about-face on new military retirement cuts
Wednesday - 1/29/2014, 4:06am EST
Just slightly more than a month after Congress voted by an overwhelming margin to cut back military retiree pensions as part of the Ryan-Murray budget agreement, members of the Senate Armed Services Committee were unanimous Tuesday in pressing to repeal the provision as soon as possible.
The Defense Department agreed wholeheartedly, despite its desire to slow its spending in the broader category of military compensation.
As one of its deficit reduction measures, the two-year budget accord aimed to save $6 billion over the next 10 years by reducing military retirees' annual cost of living adjustments to one percentage point below inflation from working age until they reach age 62. Because of a legislative oversight, the cutbacks also applied to retirees who can't work — those who retired because of a disability.
While Congress ironed out that glitch when it passed an omnibus appropriations bill earlier this month, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and his colleagues on the Armed Services Committee say the COLA cuts to the rest of the retiree population are unfair.
"I believe it's wrong because it targets a single group — military retirees — to help address the budget problems of the federal government as a whole," said Levin, the committee chairman. "While reforms have been made to the federal civilian pension system over the past several years, those changes applied prospectively to new employees. By contrast, this change to military pensions will apply upon implementation to current retirees, their families and survivors."
Wait and see urged
The absence of grandfathering in the pension scaleback is one issue that outraged advocacy groups for military personnel; another is that it sidestepped the ongoing work of a special commission Congress appointed just a year ago to take a holistic look at the military compensation system and put it on a more sustainable fiscal footing.
The law that created that panel specifically told members not to recommend any changes to the benefits enjoyed by current military members and retirees, so the COLA change came as a bit of a surprise to the Pentagon.
"To my knowledge, no DoD officials were consulted on the details of the Bipartisan Budget Act, including the consumer price index-minus-1 provision," said Christine Fox, the acting deputy secretary of Defense. "If the Congress decides to retain the CPI-minus-1 approach, we strongly recommend it be modified to include grandfathering. But because of the complex nature of military retirement benefits, I would urge that the Congress not make any changes in this area until the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission presents its final report in February 2015. There are many ways we might change military retirements, including far more fundamental reforms. Because this provision does not go into effect until December 2015, there is ample time for such a careful review, including waiting for the commission to provide its input."
Given that breathing room over the next two years, Defense officials made clear that they are not planning to propose any changes to military retirement in the annual budget submission the Obama administration expects to deliver in early March. They're wary of lawmakers doing any more tinkering before the commission reports back to Congress early next year. For example, if the commission decided it was appropriate to make some kind of changes to retiree COLAs, DoD worries the panel might be denied that opportunity if lawmakers act now to overcorrect what they now perceive as a mistake.
"We believe changes to our retirement plan, if appropriate, should only be made after the commission takes a holistic look at the many variables involved in such a plan," said Adm. James Winnefeld, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "Accounting for changes in the cost of living is only one of those variables, and it's far too soon to reach a conclusion on whether it should be part of a grandfathered plan. I'd also say that however and whenever the specific provision is addressed should not permanently remove cost of living adjustments as a potential variable in a future grandfathered plan. In other words, we don't have to rush in to this. We just need to make sure we get it right."
Bills to change on the table
But at least among members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, lawmakers have no interest in waiting.
After the avalanche of angry emails and phone calls they received from military members and retirees over the last month, they're eager to disavow at least the pension portion of the vote and put the issue behind them as quickly as possible.