A Jimmy Carter welcome home to the troops
Chief Tango sends us a link from Rick Maze at the Army Times, reporting the news that the Rand Corporation endorses a pay freeze, a cut back in bonuses and caps to subsequent pay raises, because “Smaller military raises are “unlikely to hurt capability and readiness””.
I hear Jimmy Carter applauding loudly, because these are exactly the policies that gutted the military in the late 70s. When I reenlisted for 6 years in the infantry in 1978, I got a $2300 bonus paid out in four increments. If I hadn’t been so in love with the life, I wouldn’t have stayed. Two years before that, there was a $12,000 lump sum bonus for six years, for your comparison.
When I got promoted from corporal to sergeant, my monthly pay went up $23. And then a month before the 1980 election, Carter gave us a 25% raise. The following year, three years away from the election Ronald Reagan gave us a 36% raise.
The Rand Corporation complains that there have been years that the military pay exceeded the civilian sector. Gee, that’s too damn bad, isn’t it? If the civilians were so jealous of military pay, why didn’t they join the military – there’s always that option, huh?
Maze writes;
Rand, however, says that a one-time pay freeze or one-time pay cap has the best chance of passing because they would be viewed as short-term responses to the high unemployment rate in the civilian labor market and an effort to reduce deficit spending.
Longer-term cap caps would be harder to sustain, especially if the civilian job market improved to the point that military recruiting became more difficult and mid-career service members decided to leave the ranks to take civilian jobs.
Yeah, well, unemployment during the Carter years was nearly double-digit and I didn’t see job-hungry Americans flocking to the recruiters’ offices – but, you know, that’s just a real life example, not a Power Point presentation ginned up by a computer model and thunk on by the brilliant denizens of the Rand’s offices who probably have more military experience than me.
Couple these suggestions with the recommendations for cutting the pay of National Guard, increase the amount of training time that the military will require the Reserves and the National Guard and I see the toothless military that Reagan inherited in 1981. But what do I know…I remember jumping from the tailgates of duece-and-a-halfs as they drove down Sicily Drop Zone so we could practice assembling on the drop zone because there was no money for aircraft.
I’m sure some of you have your own horror stories of the Carter years.
Category: Military issues
Well, that particular case, if true, does seem excessive and abuseive NHS, but certainly not enough to negate the entire concept of fair retirement compensation.
Public servants? Public servants? Did someone really refer to non-military government employees as public servants? Naw. Couldn’t be.
It’s not an isolated occurrence, Joe. Over 5,400 CA school administrators are receiving annual pensions exceeding $100k.
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/vallejo-ca/TVH68D8HQ3IMG9G37
A fire chief in Florida convicted of using her official position to engage in a scam was allowed to keep her pension of $167k per year.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2012/03/jailed-fire-chief-keeps-six-figure-public-pension/
A hundred public employees in NY retired in 2011 alone that will draw $100k+ annual pensions.
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2012/June/12/pub_empl_pensins-12Jun12.html
PA? 638 as of a couple of months ago draw that from the state.
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2012/June/12/pub_empl_pensins-12Jun12.html
And apparently literally thousands in IL also draw 6-figure pensions from the state.
http://ssm.nwherald.com/projects/pension/
For comparison, it appears that approx 15,000 former Federal employees are also drawing 6-figure pensions – out of a total of 1.8 million federal retirees. By my math, that works out to on the order of 0.83% of all federal retirees – or about 1 out of 120. And it includes retired presidents, VPs, Members of Congress, etc . . . .
The average Federal pension is approx $31,600. And that number is heavily skewed by the fact that many if not most recipients are under the “old system” (CSRS), which closed to new entrants in 1983 and is substantially more generous than the current Federal retirement system.
http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2012/01/many-federal-retirees-receiving-six-figure-pensions/40874/
In contrast, as a practical matter it’s very difficult for anyone in the military to end up with a $100k military pension. To do that, you have to be a GO/FO; an O6 with 31 1/2+ years of active-duty service; or a W5 with 37+ years of service. (Theoretically the SMA could do it too, but he’d have to serve nearly 44 years to manage that).
I shipped for OSUT at Benning in 78 for Basic, AIT and Airborne schools. (Harmony Church and the 44th Airborne Co.)
Jumping off the tailgates of deuce-and-a-half’s on Sicily. I remember calling them “CH-35’s.” We rigged c-rat cases and 5 gallon water cans with 550 cord and a poncho with a sandbag for a d-bag to drop from Huey’s, then kicked them off the tailgate of the CH-35 (dragging them through the old shrapnel on Sicily and cutting my poncho to shreds.)
I was in the Scout platoon and we had jeeps with M-60’s mounted. We became “AH-151’s” and “strafed” the edges of the DZ as the CH-35’s lumbered along behind us “dropping” the rest of the troops (proper PLF’s were demanded from squad ldr’s and Plt sgt’s.) We only shot live ammo twice a year and didn’t have many blanks to train with. We only jumped once every three months to maintain our jump status.
After Reagan became POTUS we jumped every week and went to the ranges all the time. And we got some big pay raises. And we got our berets back.
Ladies and Gentleman, elect me as a Congressman for 1 term. the lifetime retirement and medical far exceeds my VA benefits. Plus , I get to recieve all the above mentioned bennies . I promise to vote against all gun grabbing Bills. Joe
Joe Williams: Congressional retirement is merely another form of Federal retirement, except that a different accrual rate is used. For newly-elected folks without 5 full years of other service as a Federal civilian under the “old system”, the rate is 1.7% of high-3 average for the first 20 years and 1% a year for each year thereafter. You have to have at least 5 years of service to qualify – so I believe you’d have to be reelected twice to qualify for a pension (military service can be captured for retirement credit by paying a deposit but I don’t believe it counts towards pension vesting requirements). The lower amount of years required and the higher multiplier are due to the fact that Congresscritters have to stand for reelection periodically and can be booted every 2 or 6 years. Like any other Federal retiree, they can’t draw their pension until at least age 55. And they don’t get “free medical for life” – they get the same medical coverage (voluntary payment of premiums of around $4000 or so a year for family coverage, depending on plan chosen) as any other Federal retiree. A member of Congress who serves for 12 years (2-term Senator) and then fails to get reelected would have a high-3 average of around $174,000 (today) and would get 20.4% of that as an annual pension starting no earlier than age 55. That’s just short of $35,500 annually. After 20 years in Congress, they’d get an annual pension of just over $59,000. At 30 years in Congress, the pension would be roughly $76,500 – not bad, but hardly even close to $100k a year. Much higher Congressional pensions were possible under the “old system” (CSRS), as that calculated the pension at 2.5% per year of Congressional service. However, that system was closed to new entrants on 1 Jan 1983. Very few elected to Congress today (or who fail to achieve reelection) qualify to have their Congressional pension calculated under those rules these days. They’d have to have 5 years of federal civilian service under the old rules when elected… Read more »