Watch Live: House to Address Unemployment in the National Guard

*Update: The hearing was delayed and came to order at 10:24 a.m. The live stream is now available. 

The House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity will host a hearing this morning to address growing concerns of unemployment among members of the National Guard. The hearing will come to order at 10 a.m. in room 334 of the Cannon House Office Building. To view live video from the proceedings, click here.

This morning’s hearing comes in the wake of persistent reports from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicating that military men and women serving in the National Guard and Reserve face unemployment at rates of up to 30 percent in certain states. The VFW, which has been vocal on the issue of unemployment in the Guard, will be on hand for the hearing and plans to submit testimony for the record.

Ted Daywalt, president and founder of the VFW-supported employment resource VetJobs, will testify before the subcommittee alongside National Guard leaders from the across the country and Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Veterans Employment and Training Service Ismael “Junior” Ortiz. To view a full list of participants, click here.

The VFW is concerned that unemployment among the Guard and Reserve not only threatens the immediate readiness of the military’s operational reserve force, but also threatens the future viability of the all-volunteer force, which has relied heavily on the reserve component over the last decade.

Veterans’ employment remains a top priority for the VFW in the current Congressional session. VFW leaders hope to build on the success of last session’s passage of the VOW to Hire Heroes Act by ensuring that reserve component service members also have the kinds of job opportunities they deserve.

Updates and VFW reaction from today’s hearing will be available later today on this blog.

Watch Live: House Committee Questions VA on Pharmaceutical Contracts

*Update: Hearing adjourned at 12:25 p.m. Eastern. 

VFW is on hand for the House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing this morning on alleged contracting issues within VA’s prescription drug program. The committee called the hearing in response to concerns that VA may have purchased prescription drugs off-contract.

The hearing started at 10 a.m. in the committee’s chambers, room 335 of the Cannon House Office Building. To view live video from the hearing, click here.

Key witnesses include VA Deputy Secretary W. Scott Gould and VA Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Audits and Evaluations Linda Halliday.

To view a full list of witnesses, click here. Remarks for each witness should be available following today’s hearing. Check back later today for VFW reaction and updates.

VFW Denounces Survey on Military Benefits; What do You Think?

This week Stars & Stripes reported that a defense think tank, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, was looking to conduct a survey of current and former military service members to gather data on which benefits remain top priorities for those who volunteer to serve. The survey comes in the wake of announcements from Department of Defense officials that personnel benefits and programs – particularly retirement pensions and health care – could face potential cuts in the coming years. The VFW has vowed to fight these potential cuts at all costs.

After reading through the CSBA survey, VFW leaders balked at the tone of the questions, which asked participants to rate certain military benefits over others, and then determine the kinds of benefit packages that would be preferable to service members in the future. The survey also asked for pointed demographic information such as service branch, years active, overseas deployments, and age. The VFW is discouraging its members from participating in the survey, since the data will likely be used as an endorsement of certain benefit cuts by service members, themselves.

“Our military men and women have earned these benefits through their honorable wartime service over the last decade, and the VFW is insulted that these same men and women would now be asked to put their heads in a noose by tacitly admitting cuts to their earned benefits are somehow acceptable,” said VFW Legislative Director Ray Kelley. “The VFW does not accept the notion that cuts to personnel programs and benefits are the only viable solution. We have an obligation to provide for our war-fighters and their loved ones, and the VFW will not let Congress or the Pentagon shirk that obligation.”

Kelley went on to say that the survey’s pointed questions on specific cuts and proposed changes actually pit different demographic groups of service members and veterans against each other – enlisted versus officer, retiree versus separated service member, or even young versus old – by asking questions like whether a one-time pay raise would be worth deferring all retiree benefits until 65.

“These kinds of questions are loaded from the beginning,” said Kelley. “Since 92 percent of military men and women choose to leave before retirement, the likely answer will favor a pay raise, which would essentially endorse cutting benefits for those who choose career military service. We shouldn't be asked to choose one over the other.”

At first glance, the survey looks like it offers service members and veterans a voice in the debate on potential cuts to the DoD budget. However, the VFW believes that the CSBA has already made up its mind that quality-of-life cuts are on the way, and data compiled from the survey will offer a military endorsement to move forward with specific recommendations.

In testimony before the House Budget Committee in 2010, CSBA equated military personnel benefit costs to pension costs for companies like General Motors. Though the testimony did not recommend specifics, the tone implied that providing for the needs of war-fighters was a wasteful venture for the Pentagon.

The VFW was the first major veterans organization to see these kinds of cuts on the horizon as part of last summer’s “10 for 10” campaign. Since the program’s roll-out, VFW leaders have consistently sought input from VFW members and veterans around the country, calling to preserve earned military and veterans’ benefits.

"Service members and veterans already have a voice in this debate, and they've consistently used that voice to say 'no' to proposed benefit cuts through advocates like the VFW and through direct outreach to Congressional offices," said Kelley. "We’ll do everything in our power to make sure their voices continue to be heard over the voices of those looking for a quick fix."

VFW is in the process of assessing the military retirement system and plans to make recommendations that can start a conversation on cost savings while maintaining the integrity of the system. The VFW wants to demonstrate that the Pentagon may actually be able to offer improved benefits for military personnel and at the same time save money simply by implementing smarter business practices. Be on the look-out for these specific recommendations in the coming weeks.

In the meantime, we want to know what you think about proposed changes to military benefits and which courses of action would be the most responsible. Take our short poll and please leave your comments below.

What should Congress do about military retirement benefits?

Keep earned benefits the same. Find savings elsewhere.Keep benefits the same, but defer all pensions to 65Keep the 20-year system, but offer some benefits for non-career serviceChange over to a 401(k)-style system for allIncrease pay, but cut all benefitsOther (details in comments)

pollcode.com free polls

VFW Reacts to Pentagon Budget Priorities

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta unveiled the Pentagon’s budget priorities this week for fiscal year 2013, reflecting the Administration’s calls for a leaner, more agile force as the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down. In light of pledges from the Pentagon to ensure that the U.S. military remains a lethal and effective force, VFW leaders voiced their concerns over proposed cuts that could dilute the quality of America’s military and possibly threaten the continued viability of the all-volunteer force.

The Defense Department is expected to request $525 billion as a baseline budget for FY2013, with an additional $88.4 billion for overseas contingencies; $6 billion and $27 billion less, respectively, than FY 2012. Five key strategies for DoD include driving the future military force, which will be smaller and leaner; repositioning with more emphasis on Asia-Pacific and the Middle East; strengthening through better alliances and partnerships; and developing an extremely agile and deadly force, which will be second-to-none in technology and capability.

Some key priorities and choices that could be made over the next five years include:

• To reduce the active Army from 570,000 to 490,000 soldiers, and the active Marine Corps from 202,000 to 182,000.
• To reduce the number of Air Force tactical air squadrons from 60 to 54, but maintain the current bomber fleet, as well as the Navy’s 11 aircraft carriers, 10 air wings and big-deck amphibious fleet.
• To fund a new bomber, increase cruise missile capacity in future Virginia-class submarines, and increase investments in cyber capabilities, special operations, homeland missile defense, countering weapons of mass destruction, and projecting power into denied areas.
• To provide service members full pay raises in 2013 and 2014, but begin limiting increases starting in 2015.
• To ask Congress to conduct a comprehensive review of the military retirement system, while grandfathering all current retirees and service members into the existing system.
• To recommend increases in healthcare fees, co-pays and deductibles for military retirees using a tiered approach, based on their retired pay, as well as create a TRICARE for Life enrollment fee for retirees age 65 and older. Exempt would be medical retirees and survivors of those who died on active duty.

In response to the announcement, VFW leaders said they continue to be wary of plans to change the current military retirement system and potentially saddle military retirees with higher health care costs.

“We are pleased to continually hear pledges from the White House and Pentagon that retirees and those serving in uniform today will be grandfathered under the old system, but our concern is for tomorrow's recruit,” said VFW Executive Director Bob Wallace. “Asking someone to first donate 20 or more years of their youth in return for the immediate receipt of a modest retirement pay is a contract, which cannot be compared with any civilian occupation or retirement plan. We are concerned, however, that by introducing civilian retirement plans into a military world it has zero in common with, could signal the end of the all-volunteer force. A lot of trial balloons have been floated, so we have to wait for details.”

Traditionally, only eight percent of America’s military men and women serve until retirement age. With already low retention of career service members, the VFW is concerned that too many new proposed incentives for highly-trained and highly-qualified leaders to leave the military early could thin the force to such an extent that the last person standing, not the best qualified, could serve as the next service chief or senior enlisted leader. Plus, too many incentives to leave could also mean a watered down G.I. Bill for veterans.

VFW leaders went on to say that increasing enrollment fees and copayments while reducing services for retirees is a breach of faith with all who choose to serve; a sentiment the VFW has consistently voiced since launching the “10 for 10” campaign against military and veterans’ benefits cuts last summer.

When discussions of an overhaul to the military retirement first surfaced, the VFW polled readers on this blog about their inclinations to serve a full career with watered-down retirement benefits. The results, which can be viewed here, indicated to VFW leaders that such changes would threaten the continued viability of the all-volunteer force by incentivizing the best and brightest to leave early in their military careers.

Your VFW will continue to fight against these proposals, ensuring that America’s military remains strong and sustainable for future generations. Keep posted to this blog for updates.

(Image: Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, brief the press on major budget decisions stemming from the defense strategic guidance at the Pentagon, Jan. 26, 2012. DoD photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley.)

VFW Hosts Libyan Delegation to Discuss Caring For Vets

The VFW Washington Office this week hosted a six-member delegation from the transitional government of Libya to explain how the United States cares for her veterans. The delegation, comprised of members of Libya's National Economic Development Board, is participating in a 10-day visit to the United States, in coordination with the U.S. State Department, to learn how Libya might establish new governmental systems to care for those who fought and were injured in the recent rebellion that toppled their former dictator, Muammar Gaddafi.

In addition to meeting with government officials from the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs, the delegation sought out the advice of the VFW, the nation’s largest organization of combat veterans, to learn how advocates view the landscape of veterans’ services, and ways in which an organized veterans’ community can work to ensure those who are injured in battle receive the care and services they need to lead productive lives once the war ends.

VFW Executive Director Bob Wallace said he was encouraged by the steps Libya’s interim government has taken to quickly address the needs of their war wounded.

“The fact that you are here shows how serious you are about taking care of your warfighters,” said Wallace. “This won’t be an easy task, but the VFW is happy to assist in any way we can.”

During the meeting, Wallace and his staff discussed the evolution of veterans’ organizations and veterans’ services in the United States since the VFW's founding in 1899, with special focus on health care and transitional needs of those who served in harm’s way, but who must now readjust to life after war.

The Libyan delegates said they faced two critical challenges in caring for those who fought in the revolution. First, those who comprised the rebellion against Gaddafi were not formally aligned with an organized military entity, meaning no formal paper trail can connect them to the battlefield. Second, those who fought in Gaddafi’s Army are still Libyans, and many may have been forced to fight against their will, prompting questions about benefits to which they should or might be entitled.

VFW Deputy Service Director Jerry Manar correlated the rebels’ paperwork dilemma to that facing Filipino citizens who took up arms to fight the Japanese alongside U.S. forces during World War II. After the war, Filipinos had the opportunity to prove their status through corroborating evidence to receive veterans’ benefits from the United States, but the window for establishing veterans' status closed shortly afterward.

The Libyan delegation concluded that their first action should be providing care for those who were wounded in battle. Reconciliation among Libyans could wait for a new formal government, but now the healing for those who suffered during the war must begin.

VFW leaders said the session was productive and inspiring, and that the VFW looks forward to working with Libya’s fledgling government to help ensure that they properly care for their brave citizens who help to free Libya.

(Image: VFW leaders pose for a photo in Omar E. Ketchum Hall at the VFW's Washington office alongside delegates from the interim Libyan government after this week's meeting to discuss veterans' issues. VFW photo.)