More predictions becoming reality
Since before the 2008 elections I’ve been predicting that Democrats will try to make it look like they’re balancing the budget and they’ll do it on the backs of the active duty and retiree military. Yesterday the DoD announced that they’ll slash manpower by 69,000 soldiers and Marines.
Today, it’s retirees;
On Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates called the military’s future health care costs “unaffordable” and said the department could save up to $7 billion over the next five years with modest increases in Tricare fees for working-age retirees. Active-duty troops and their families would not be affected by the plan.
“The current Tricare enrollment fee was set in 1995 at $460 a year for the basic family plan and has not been raised since,” Gates told reporters. “During this time, insurance premiums paid by the private sector and other government workers have risen dramatically. For example, the fees for a comparable health insurance program for federal workers cost roughly $5,000 per year.”
As a result, he said, many of those retirees forgo their employer’s health plan to remain with Tricare, creating a heavy burden on the defense budget.
Yeah, we forego our employers’ health plan because part of the reason that we stayed on in the military was that the government promised us free health care for the remainder of our lives. We knew our pensions were going to be a pittance and the prospect of dependable health care sweetened retirement. We earned our health care in good faith.
We worked, did our best and stuck it out through rough times because we had faith in our government keeping it’s promises. We were there every time you called, now we get this shit. We paid and you’re reneging.
And, oh, it WILL affect active duty soldiers when it’s their turn as retirees. The active duty military doesn’t stay in a static pool. Think they’re going to make a career out of the military when they see how we are getting treated?
And in 2009, veterans groups lashed out at the White House when officials there resurrected the idea.
You ain’t seen nothing yet, ass wipe.
Category: Veterans Issues
I seem to recall, when I signed up during that little tiff in SE Asia, that I was SUPPOSED to get free health care FOR LIFE.
I wonder whatever happened to that?
Since I never track this sort of thing, she who must be obeyed does all of that, but she did mention to me, after reading somewhere else about this proposal, that we pay $600 a year. Still low compared to private insurance I know, but then she threw in the part about deductibles, a dental plan that is non existent and don’t even think about vision as well as finding providers willing to accept Tricare.
Tricare has their own billing procedures, separate and distinct from most others which creates administrative headaches for doctors and gives them one more reason not to take it.
I made my sacrifice up front so liberals that want to scream hypocrite can save their breath. The counter argument of course is going to be that we want to see cuts everywhere but in our little corner of the world. They need to go look for another target of opportunity.
>finding providers willing to accept Tricare.
Heck we are on prime until my husband retires next year. We live around Campbell and I had a hard time finding a provider. Nobody wanted Tricare which reimburses on the Medicare fee schedule. It is going to get even worse for us Tricarees when Obama’s healthcare plan goes into full effect, and the medicare fee schedule becomes sparse.
>And, oh, it WILL affect active duty soldiers when it’s their turn as retirees.
I have to say I feel a sense of shame in this. I haven’t paid a lot of attention to retiree issues until lately when it became my husband’s turn to retire.
As much as I regret this impact on retirees it’s worth adding that the DVA appears to be under similar pressure.
Also, keep in mind that since January 1, 2011 a lot of baby boomers started turning 65 every day.
Us geezers don’t figure much into Obamacare as it is.
BOHICA!
While I’m all for supporting the troops that have risked their lives in the last 9 years wars…I have to wonder what % of retirees spent 20 years in the service and never once risked their lives for this country. How many served from the mid 70’s till 2000 and pretty much got paid to train and now have a full retirement after only 20 years?
Maybe combat should be a requirement for a 20 year term, 30 without. Everyone else has to work 40..
The right name is Tri-to-get-care. Color me surprised. Next, it’ll be my eventual retirement and VA benefits.
Mike #5: Normally I’d not bother to reply, but you are simply full of shit. Your argument does apply to everyone who draws a government check EXCEPT the military.
Do keep at it, but shift your focus.
You could ask a similar sort of question about congresscritters and be on target. Other government bureaucrats would be acceptable too.
Mike; I lost 2 people I knew while I was in, during conflict, and I know of several that were lost during training, including one I knew. Now, back in the day, you trained like you would fight and sometimes, that type of training will cost lives. We lost 2 in one training mission alone. It’s not always cushy in between conflicts and people do die. It’s the nature of the beast.
So Mike, those killed in Beirut, Grenada, Panama, Desert Storm, Somalia would not be considered to have been killed in a conflict. You dishonor them and their families service to this country. Pound sand.
Um mid 70’s to 2000 or so? We had a few things going on in the world….lets see…..um Granada, Panama, Gulf War (part 1). Somalia, Bosnia….
Jonn, I’ve been trying to wade through Gate’s proposal and it only gets worse the more I read, before even taking into account his rosy presentation.
In it, it states a TriCare family of 3 is paying $1,192/yr in premiums, already.
Instead of adding Troops to the rotation, he’s adding money to the DoD education system.
And he tries to compare 2015 Marine/Army strength to 2007, while ignoring that he cut Navy/AF.
And those Troop cuts? Yeah, he needs that so he can increase the number of DoD civilians/bureacrats, while increasing their pay not only by the same %, but also by system. His emphasis is on increasing procurement personnell while decreasing equipment procurement.
And yeah, he’s going to add to AF Reserve personnel.
But I still have a lot to read in his plan to refocus from a forward looking plan to one of taping current equipment together for at least 5 more years.
This thing is worse than a PR look at it demonstrates.
>RobD
Kosovo and Haiti too. Not to mention the fact that all through the 90’s servicemembers were getting killed in terrorists attacks via Bin Ladan..Khobar Towers, Embassies in Tanzania & Kenya & USS Cole.
The GWOT started long before 9/11 for military members at least!
Mike, those 20 year retirees signed a contract that did not include paying premiums for their health care it guaranteed.
They served in the Cold War, where they were considered a trip wire, to be sacrificed so Americans would support a response, at a time when the German/Russian Hordes would flood the Fulda Gap and the NoRK’s flood the South with a destroyed dam and a Million Starving soldiers, when Russian tactical nukes were designed to kill everyone, even their own.
The reason 20 year retirements are in order is because the Military life is harsh, for a contract and particularly for a 20 year career. Take a look at a military retiree and you will see how much faster they aged over their peers. Then again, that’s the same reason oil companies offer 10 year retirements and civilians are expected to retire at 65.
The military is NOT like the DVM where you sit on your tokus all say and draw a modest pension. Its a profession where you are, daily busting your ass. Even if you slack off, if you’re infantry fro 20 years in Airborne, Rangers or if you’re SF, chances are you’ll get out with a shit ton of problems. Hell I was only in for 6 1/4 yrs, and I’ve got horrible problems with my back and knees, and I WAS A MEDIC! my medical records fill a 3 In 3 ring binder. I’m only a quarter the way to Retirement, and if I’ve got that many problems you can just imagine the poor fools that have been in since this shit began. If you entered in 2000 and been in since, you’ve probably seen at least three deployments, and have probably got a but load of medical issues. I’m sorry but I don’t think we do ENOUGH for the medical care of the military. i get the budget cuts and all but you will soon see a day where the benefits are gone and only patriotism remains to spur young individuals to serve. seeing the state our country is in. . . the Last Centurion WILL take a barbarian bride before too long
#5 mike: Pound sand, asshat!
You called it Jonn. I really didn’t think anybody would do something this ignorant during a time of war.
Just like Clinton did, only he wasn’t dealing with a war.
Old Soldier, Bill was selling the stock which afforded us the “Peace Dividend” but like you said, it was during “peace.”
Gates is selling his bill of sale as “Taking Care of Troops” while cutting the number and equipment they need, and increasing their costs while allowing them only the legally required pay increases.
He’s barely saying that he wants to use baling wire to keep planes in the sky while increasing the bureacrats on the payroll.
All Un-Constitutional spending should be cut before the Constitutionally mandated “common defense”
Mike, #5: “How many served from the mid 70’s till 2000 and pretty much got paid to train and now have a full retirement after only 20 years?”
I guess all the ones who skipped Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Desert Shield/Storm, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Desert Fox, and Kosovo. But for all of the ones who didn’t go to any of those places…they were willing and able. They just weren’t called.
“Everyone else has to work 40..” True. But keep this in mind: officers who retire can really retire on their pensions. If they want to, that is, and many choose to still work. Enlisted folks, on the other hand, find their “retirement” to be nice suplemental income. It’s not enough to pay the bills, so they still have to go get a job. I was on the phone the other day with a friend of mine who just retired after twenty years. Yes, he saw combat: Desert Storm in ’91, and Iraq in ’03 and ’05. He’s working for a railroad and quietly suffering with some unexplained symptoms that he suspects might be Gulf War Syndrome. I’d bet he doesn’t appreciate hikes in health care costs.
Here’s my suggestion. No more government hacks, illegal aliens, abortion subsidies, and SSI for young people who are just too obese to work. And while we’re at it, no more NASA, National Endowment for the Arts, PBS and NPR, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Education. Trim back the FBI until it addresses only true federal crimes and leaves the rest to the states.
Now, I understand that budgets are tight. I wonder, however, if the Democrats would propose cuts to Medicare? Or to government civilians’ entitlements? Or is just the military that has to eat a shit sandwich? Of course, (most) Medicare receipients paid into the system. But military folks volunteered for the world’s most dangerous job, thus doing something to EARN what they were promised.
Want to hit this one from the left as well as the right, Jonn?
“I have to wonder what % of retirees spent 20 years in the service and never once risked their lives for this country.”
Based on my experiences- TXARNG 85-88 we had a UH-1 full of combat engineers crash, all on board killed.
When I was in the 82nd Airborne 92-94, one jump master candidate torn in half, an SFC took 3 7.62 rounds in the chest, DOA and a guy in my company had his air stolen and ended up with a crippled spine…
People who serve in combat arms suffer the same injuries and abuse their bodies worse than pro athletes do, for decades.
Take a flying leap through a rolling doughnut, Mikey-boy.
[…] really should. Head over there and read this little article (click this link)… Since before the 2008 elections I’ve been predicting that Democrats will try to make it […]
#5 Mike>
If you ever get the chance, you should glance through back issues of “Navy Times” from the 70’s and 80’s, especially the “Sea Service Obituaries”. There were many names every week of folks lost at sea, in accidents, etc. It’s a dangerous job, and folks did it not because of the pay, but because, overall, they felt a calling to it. The Federal Government offset that lesser pay by promising to take care of us afterward. We kept our part of the bargain, I have the “Honorable Discharge” certificate (and other things) to prove it. Now they want to change the terms of the contract. That won’t fly.
But danger? yeah we had that. From December ’77 through 78, my command lost 3 aircraft with all aboard. Some 30 fellows who never came home. 2 of them were good friends of mine.
Like Doc Bailey says, it’s a hard life. Tight now, I can barely walk. I have damage to my spine and legs, and looking at more surgery. I’ve already had 8 rounds of it.
I did my part. More than some, less than others, but I was there and kept my part of the bargain. My government should be honest enough to keep their part.
If Chrysler or WalMart did this to their retirees, the government would be rightly crawling up their corporate ass with microscopes.
“#20 Army Sergeant Says:
January 8th, 2011 at 3:52 am
Want to hit this one from the left as well as the right,
Jonn?”
Why, did Jonn certainly turn from blogger to journalist overnight and claim unbiased coverage?
There really is no left and right way to look at this, only right and wrong- and there’s nothing about this that’s not wrong.
“If Chrysler or WalMart did this to their retirees, the government would be rightly crawling up their corporate ass with microscopes”. Wal-Mart, yes, Chrysler no, Jonn. Chrysler is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the gubermint and the UAW, so no touchee.
To clarify, ROS, that was an offer, not an accusation. Like, “Hey Jonn, I’ve got a brilliant idea, left vets groups should hit this just as hard as the conservative right-style ones. What do you think?”
Knowing how vindictive Obami is, could it that the reduction as far as personnel in Army, and Marines be connected to approve of their DADT policy? After all these two branches were the most in the survey rejecting the lifting of this policy?
I put nothing behind their vindictive nature.
It galls me to reduce personnel in time of war, but then again dems are known for it; last time it was clinton bringing on this calamity.
What are the odds, AS, that the left-leaning “vets’ groups” jump on this? They can claim to act in the best interests of veterans, but when it comes to blatant disregard for the military through acts like this, we won’t be hearing sweet jacques from any of them.
The massive corporations Wal-Mart and Chysler were brought up referencing cutting retirees benefits. I live in a town with a Caterpillar plant. Every couple of years, we brace for a strike/lockout as the UAW negotiates their contract with CAT. And every time, CAT cuts into the benefits of the retirees while the UAW leadership bend over and gladly take it “there”. It is a similar situation to what Gates is proposing as those who are no longer being “productive members” of the organization are being cast aside in favor of face-saving cuts.
Also, I would like to remind the readers here how Adm. Mullens was just saying a few months ago about how the military was going to start having to pick and choose which operations they performed due to lack of money and now he is endorsing cutting funding and troop levels?
Sorry but Adm. Mullens appears to be simply an Obama “yes-man”.
Of course they do not point our that the average government worker, non military, has had HIS income increase by over 80 percent during the time of 1995 to 2011. Where the military worker’s pay has increased about .000000001 percent during this same time frame. AND THERE IS NO INFLATION FROM 2009 TO 2011, said, white house, from the oral office.
What could go wrong?