Remember That Pay Cut? Combat Pay for Soldiers in Iraq Expires September 30
Liam M. Truchard
Springfield News-Leader (Missouri)
news-leader.com
Posted 9/15/2003 9:34:00 PM
September 15, 2003, Summary: Flip - Flop - Flip. First President George Bush's Department of Defense asked Congress to cut the pay of US soldiers fighting in Iraq. After a firestorm of public opposition, David Chu, a Bush political appointee at the Pentagon, said the military would not cut soldiers' pay. The Pentagon blew it. The soldiers' combat pay expires on September 30, 2003, and it may take a month or longer for Congress to restore combat pay ...
Soldiers' paychecks in danger of shrinking
Increases in two stipends will expire at month's end unless Congress acts.
Springfield, Missouri - First they were activated. Then their tours were extended.
Now, some members of the Missouri National Guard called up to active duty for the war on terrorism face having their pay cut.
Increases in stipends for soldiers separated from their families and in harm's way are set to expire Sept. 30, unless Congress renews them, according to the Department of Defense's Web site.
"They kind of forget that these guys have families and jobs and lives of their own," said Melissa Chambers, whose husband, Michael, is a sergeant in the National Guard's 1138th Military Police Company.
In April, "hostile fire" pay for soldiers in the combat zone rose from $150 to $225 per month. "Separation pay," for soldiers away from families, jumped from $100 to $250 per month.
Missouri National Guard spokeswoman Staff Sgt. Joyce Kilmer said no decision has been made and the fate of the money rests in Congress' hands.
For soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon has said it intends to keep the bonuses, using other funding sources if necessary, according to a Department of Defense statement.
But that could mean an even bigger cut for the members of the 1138th. The company deployed to the Middle East in April, spending most of that time in Kuwait, where members received the hazard pay. Recently, the unit moved to Qatar.
That leaves the families of reservists stationed in surrounding countries uncertain whether to expect a pay cut. Denise Emert, a family support lead volunteer for the 1138th, has told the unit's families not to jump to conclusions until they see their next paychecks.
"Since it's really not definite, I've told them not to freak out yet," Emert said.
Emert's husband, Ray, worked as an emergency medical technician at St. John's Regional Health Center before his call-up. The cut would represent about one-eighth of her income and equal a car payment. She said the cut would not deeply hurt her two children, Matthew, 4, and Sarah, 2, but it's still a large amount.
"If I have to cook macaroni and cheese instead of going out for pizza three times a week, I'll do that," Emert said.
What is clear is some of the stipends have been reduced. Denise Emert noted a $150 drop in her August payments. Melissa Chambers saw a $100 cut. Both are still checking to see why those reductions occurred.
Chambers said her family loses $1,500 per month for the time her husband spends away from his civilian job as a plumber.
Sitting in the tidy, well-kept home of her grandmother — who happens to be her next-door neighbor — in Taney County, Melissa Chambers admits the time apart from her husband of nearly a decade is difficult, as it is for most of the members in the unit.
She and grandmother Margaret Baran say Melissa spends more time at the home because of loneliness. The pay cut is just another thing to worry about, she said.
Chambers, a secretary, said she would make do but would have to cut out luxuries like weekend .
"It's just cutting and saving and doing all you can," Chambers said.
The long tour of duty has strained families, Chambers said. They feel proud of their husbands' service but are weary of their absence.
Besides the questions of pay, the women do not know when their husbands will return. Though their tours have officially been extended to April, there is the possibility it could be longer.
"I try not to expect anything before April," Emert said. "It only sets you up for disappointment."
The hardships may also hurt retention of soldiers in the future. Chambers said her husband's enlistment ends next year, and she does not expect him to re-enlist.
Given the choice, Chambers and others are more than willing to give up the extra stipend to have their spouses moved farther from harm's way, regardless of whether it puts an extra burden on an already strapped family.
"I'd rather have him where he is," Chambers said. "I'd rather have him at home, but at least I know he's safe."
Reporter Kevin Bowen contributed to this story.First they were activated. Then their tours were extended.
timesrecord.com
Rumsfeld team stumbles over perception of pay cuts
08/27/2003
Military Update, P.O. Box 231111,
Centreville, VA 20120-1111;
or send e-mail to milupdate@aol.com.
Defense Department officials have characterized as “absurd” the notion that they support a pay reduction Oct. 1 for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The notion arose, however, within the department itself.
Despite a hurried press conference Aug. 14 to ease the impact on troop morale, Defense officials still couldn’t explain in detail how U.S. occupation forces would avoid a pay cut if Congress follows the Bush administration’s own advice and allows up to $225 a month in special pay raises to expire.
In July, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and staff corresponded with the chairmen of the armed services committees to give guidance to House-Senate conferees on resolving differences in separate versions of the 2004 defense bills. Among items Rumsfeld and staff opposed were “unrequested” increases in pays and allowances including a $150-a-month increase in Family Separation Allowance (FSA) and a $75-a-month boost in Imminent Danger Pay (IDP).
Congress enacted both raises last April, and made them retroactive to October 2002, as a “thank you” to deployed service members, particularly those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The special pay increases, however, are set to expire Sept. 30 unless Congress votes to extend them.
The Senate version of the defense bill would make the FSA and IDP increases permanent. The House would keep them only until Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, in Afghanistan, ended.
Defense officials had advised against either alternative but, until the recent firestorm, proposed no substitute. Since last spring Defense officials argued against the special pay increases, saying they were inefficient as an award for troops deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan because the extra money goes to tens of thousands of service members deployed elsewhere.
Family Separation Allowance, which Congress raised from $100 a month to $250, is paid to any service member forced to live away from family for more than 30 days. Before the Iraq war, roughly 200,000 members drew FSA — including married sailors and Marines on routine sea deployments.
Imminent Danger Pay, which jumped from $150 a month to $225, is paid to anyone serving in one of scores of designated danger areas around the world. At least 250,000 drew danger pay before the Iraq war.
David Chu, under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, said that last April’s increases were like “using a sledgehammer to hit a small nail.”
In early August, Army Times focused anew on DoD’s opposition to extending the special pay increases beyond Sept. 30. A headline said the department wanted to “slash” danger and separation pay. This sparked other news articles, along with scathing editorials and feigned outrage by Democrats including nine declared presidential candidates for 2004.
On Aug. 14, Chu and Larry Di Rita, the department’s acting spokesman, held a news conference to try to defuse the issue. Di Rita called reports that the administration supported pay cuts for those in Iraq and Afghanistan not just wrong but “absurd.”
Chu said he was “startled” by the uproar and said the administration was committed to protecting pay levels for troops facing combat. By the time their press conference ended, however, the pair still left unanswered how DoD could protect pay levels for troops in two countries while urging Congress to allow the special pay increases to expire.
“There is an open issue about how we're going to do that,” Chu said. But, he added, DoD “has a variety of pay and allowance powers” to make it happen. He referred to a possible increase in hazardous duty pay, which presumably would require legislation. He also referred to a new assignment incentive pay. But DoD hadn’t proposed funding either initiative earlier.
No pay experts were made available to explain the new authorities. Chu suggested there was no need to shape a specific proposal to protect the pay of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan until Congress decides whether to extend the April increases. That strategy, however, left lawmakers with no alternative to consider in their conference next month on the defense bill.
Regardless of what Congress or the Bush administration intends to occur Oct. 1, the special pay hikes of April could disappear from paychecks for at least a month, even for troops in Iraq. That’s because Congress left town in August with increases in FSA and IDP still set to expire Sept. 30. Because military finance centers must adhere to the law as written when their deadlines arrive to set the next month's pay, October checks could reflect a temporary return to pre-Iraq pay levels, one official explained.
If so, higher payments could be restored again in November and made retroactive to Oct. 1. |
