Posts

Let’s Be Honest: Establishment GOP Broke Trust with Military Retirees

Photo Credit: RedState

Photo Credit: RedState

Republicans in the Senate want to restore veterans benefits to the Paul Ryan – Patty Murray Budget plan.

Harry Reid is blocking the amendment so Republicans are blaming Harry Reid for cutting veterans benefits.

That is intellectually dishonest of the GOP.

Paul Ryan, a Republican, drafted the plan with Patty Murray, a Democrat.

House Republicans overwhelming approved the plan before it even made it to Harry Reid for a vote. The Republicans could have restored the cuts themselves in the House. Instead, they voted for the plan with the cuts to veterans benefits and went home.

Read more from this story HERE.

Veterans Take the Hit – Senate Votes for $6 Billion in Military Pension Cuts

Photo Credit: JTF Guantanamo

Photo Credit: JTF Guantanamo

A final effort by Senate Republicans to halt cuts to pensions of military retirees failed late Tuesday, after Democrats blocked an amendment to the controversial budget bill.

The two-year budget agreement, which cleared a key test vote earlier in the day, was expected to get a final vote no later than Wednesday.

Ahead of the final vote, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., tried unsuccessfully to use a parliamentary tactic to force a vote on the amendment, which he wrote to undo the cuts for military retirees.

A provision in the already House-passed bill would cut retirement benefits for military retirees by $6 billion over 10 years.

Sessions wanted to instead eliminate an estimated $4.2 billion in annual spending by reining in an IRS credit that illegal immigrants have claimed.

Read more from this story HERE.

Bipartisan Budget Deal Puts Ryan Under Fire From Fellow Conservatives

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

Representative Paul D. Ryan’s eight terms in Congress have produced much political celebrity and Republican respect but just two laws bearing the Ryan name — a renamed post office and a modified excise tax on arrows like the ones he uses for bow hunting.

Then on Tuesday he struck a budget deal with Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, that affixed a new label to the polished veneer of Mr. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican: deal maker and, to some, traitor.

With a modest, bipartisan blueprint on taxes and spending, Mr. Ryan is taking a risk he has previously shied away from, putting what party leaders see as a crucial need — ending the debilitating budget wars in Washington that have crippled the Republican brand — over his own self-interests with the conservative activists that dominate the early Republican presidential primaries.

For the first time, the conservative wunderkind and former vice-presidential nominee is taking withering fire from movement conservatives who see the deal as a betrayal by a former ally. Potential rivals for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016 immediately went on the attack, blasting the deal and challenging Mr. Ryan’s status as the thinking man’s conservative.

“It’s not just this budget; it’s this lack of long-term thinking around here,” Senator Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican considered a 2016 contender, told Mike Huckabee on his conservative radio show on Wednesday. “There are no long-term solutions apparently possible in Washington, and we are running out of time.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Rep. Gohmert: Budget Deal Violates My Principles (+video)

Photo Credit: CNS News

Photo Credit: CNS News

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) challenged Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) assertion that the budget deal he negotiated with Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) does not violate conservative principles even though it raises federal spending beyond the $967 billion limit set by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA).

“I want to be supportive because I know Paul worked hard on it, but – and he says it doesn’t violate our principles – but it violates the previous agreement we had. And that’s kinda part of my principles,” Gohmert told CNSNews.com.

“And I know it’s part of the president’s principles,” he continued. “Clearly, President Obama does not want the budget caps burst through. Why would I say that? It’s because the president, I heard him very clearly with my own ears saying that if a bill is agreed to by both Houses and he puts his signature on it, and the Supreme Court doesn’t strike it down, then it’s the law and we’re not changing it.

“So he had the idea of the sequestration. Both Houses passed that bill and he signed it into law. It’s been upheld, so it is the law of the land – the court hasn’t struck it down. So obviously, unless the president wasn’t being truthful when he said that, then he would surely want the sequestration cuts to remain in place.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Diet COLA: Murray-Ryan Budget Targets Military Retirees

Photo by Gage Skidmore

Photo by Gage Skidmore

On Wednesday, I received an email from the Air Force Sergeant’s Association (AFSA) CEO and in response posted this statement on my Facebook page: “Air Force Sergeant’s Association posted Paul Ryan proposed a cut of 1% in military retiree COLA pay each year until the retiree reaches 62. So, for me, that would be a 16% cut. I have never taken welfare or any other handout. All of my retirement is taken in taxes already. I’m interested to hear how much was slashed from the handout programs that didn’t require the recipients to give at least 20 years of their lives.” I received several requests to do an article and given the serious nature of this budget proposal and its devastating impact on all the military retirees that have served honorably and live on fixed incomes, I felt the need to heed that call.

From my earliest years as a child, I watched my father put on his Navy uniform and serve long hours to defend our nation, sometimes deploying to remote areas for several months at a time. Growing up on a military base instilled in me a desire to serve so I signed up for the Air Force while I was still a senior in high school. I joined when I was 18 years old and I gave 20 years and 2 months of my life to my country. In return, like my dad before me, I was promised a retirement benefit commensurate to my time in service and the rank I obtained which was Senior Master Sergeant (E-8.)

I joined the Air Force in April, 1986, and even at that time, Congress had their scalpels out and they were cutting benefits. One benefit that I missed out on by two days was having the 9 months of my delayed enlistment count toward my time in service. In 1990, the military changed the structure of the retirements and offered a buyback for those that served at least 15 years. Members were allowed to take a lump sum taxed at a 28% rate in exchange for a lower monthly retirement. I don’t know if that is still going on. A few years after that change, it was proposed to lower the retirement percentage from 50% of base pay after 20 years of service to 40% of base pay. But, in the past, these changes came with a grandfathered clause.

The Bipartisan Budget Act passed by the House on December 12, 2013, is the one put together behind closed doors by Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Paul Ryan that will cut the retiree benefits effective 2015 with no grandfathered clause. Under their proposal, each year a retiree will lose 1% of the adjusted Cost of Living Allowance (COLA), an amount calculated to keep up with the Consumer Price Index, until the age of 62. At that time, COLA would be readjusted to the current level. What does this mean for the average retiree? A significant loss. With the exception of the Army, no other service allows enlisted members to serve until they are 62 years old. The average person will enlist between the ages of 18-25 years old. Typically, most career military personnel make it to the 20 year mark of their careers. Some, if they make their rank in time, may serve up to 30 years. This being the case, most people retire between the ages of 38-55. This proposal will have a serious negative impact on all of them.

The following bullet points were taken directly from the House website:

– We make sensible reforms for civilian and military retirement programs.
– On the civilian side, we ask future retirees to contribute a little bit more — still well below what’s common for state and local government employees—so taxpayers don’t have to pick up the entire tab.
– And for younger military retirees, we trim their cost-of-living adjustment just a bit. It’s a modest reform for working-age military retirees.
https://budget.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364040

In an Air Force Times article, Retiree COLAs targeted in bipartisan budget deal, written by Rick Maze, he quotes the following: “To us, this seems like an odd time to decide we need to limit COLAs. Why do it now when you have a commission just formed to study retired pay and make recommendations on changes?” said Michael Hayden, government relations director of the Military Officers Association of America, referring to the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Committee that has just started its work on pay reform. Part of the commission’s order from Congress is to come up with changes in retired pay that do not harm anyone now in the military, with cuts aimed at people who enter service in the future, Hayden said. The budget agreement violates the spirit of grandfathering current service members and retirees, he said.

This budget is a direct attack on the military and its veterans and still manages to increase spending. And don’t forget, in addition to this, just three short weeks ago the Secretary of Defense proposed closing all stateside commissaries. So think about it retirees and future retirees, you’re supposed to give up retirement you’ve earned and a benefit that saves you 15-20% a month on groceries. For many of you living on fixed incomes, that can be the difference between eating and not eating.

Ryan defended the cuts. “We think it is only fair that hardworking taxpayers, who pay for the benefits that our federal employees receive, be treated fairly as well,” he said. That sounds good on the surface, but I regress to my first paragraph. My retirement is taxed and my retirement is not enough to live on independently. My husband is the primary provider of the family. At the end of the year, my entire retirement is taken back in taxes so I suppose and can just add 1% to that amount in 2015. Thank you so much Congress.

If you’re reading this article, you still have the chance to have your voice heard. This legislation will be voted on in the Senate next week and momentum is growing against it. This is your chance to make a difference, contact your Senators and let them know how you feel about the Bipartisan Budget Plan. Call the Senate switchboard and ask to be directed to your Senator’s office at 202-224-3121. While you’re on the phone with them, ask how much foreign aid was slashed. Remember, without our veterans who have sacrificed much, we would not have the freedoms we do today.
________________________________
Julie Gillette is a retired Air Force Senior Master Sergeant and disabled veteran currently living in Fairbanks, Alaska. She is active in Alaska state politics.

Budget Deal a Step Backward: Opposing View

Photo Credit: T.J. Kirkpatrick, Getty Images

Photo Credit: T.J. Kirkpatrick, Getty Images

While imperfect, the sequester has proved to be an effective tool in reducing base discretionary spending. Nonetheless, conservatives have expressed a willingness to alter the budget caps established by the 2011 debt ceiling deal in exchange for immediate and substantive structural reforms that significantly reduce spending and address the real drivers of our debt.

Unfortunately, the budget agreement struck by Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray is a step backward:

First, it represents an immediate increase in federal spending. Under the deal, discretionary spending would rise to $1.012 trillion in 2014 and $1.014 trillion in 2015, a $63 billion total increase (though it does little to provide a real and sustained fix for President Obama’s mismanagement of defense). This is a significant achievement for the president, who believes that government spending is a panacea to America’s economic woes.

Read more from this story HERE.

Lawmakers Unveil Tentative Budget Deal, Call for Rolling Back Sequester

Photo Credit: Fox News

Photo Credit: Fox News

By Fox News.

Congressional negotiators on Tuesday announced a tentative budget deal that would avoid a partial government shutdown, but also begin to unravel hard-fought spending cuts.

The lead negotiators — Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray, D-Wash., and House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis. — detailed the specifics of the proposal at an evening press conference.

“I’m proud of this agreement,” Ryan said. “It reduces the deficit—without raising taxes. And it cuts spending in a smarter way. It’s a firm step in the right direction, and I ask all my colleagues in the House to support it.”

But the measure could face a tough climb, particularly in the House which is expected to take up the bill first. Ahead of Tuesday’s announcement, fiscal conservatives raised alarm that lawmakers were proposing to roll back sequester cuts.

The proposal would restore about $63 billion in funding that had been cut by the so-called sequester. Officials said the increases would be offset by a variety of spending reductions and increased fees elsewhere in the budget totaling about $85 billion over a decade, leaving enough for a largely symbolic deficit cut of $23 billion over the next decade.

Read more from this story HERE.

_____________________________________________________________

capital-buildingdome-insideBudget Deal A “Significant Step Backwards” In Efforts To Rein In Overspending

By Steve Foley.

Today, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) announced a budget deal that would abandon the bipartisan spending limits agreed to in the 2011 Budget Control Act for two years, while seeking to offset that new spending with tens of billions in additional revenue.

Gretchen Hamel, executive director of Public Notice, issued the following statement:

“This deal amounts to a significant step backwards in the effort to rein in overspending and a complete abdication of responsibility in Washington to set priorities and make responsible decisions with our tax dollars. Given the opportunity to make the smart cuts and reforms we need, Washington instead focused on a short-term political fix that opens the door to more spending increases down the road. Members of Congress should listen to their constituents, live up to their promises and do better than this deal. The last thing Americans wanted to see from Washington was more money for more spending.”

Key Findings From Public Notice’s Latest Poll On Government Spending:

As Washington nears its Dec. 13 deadline for a budget deal, Public Notice recently released the results of a national survey of registered voters focusing on the key fiscal issues currently being debated. The survey was conducted by the Tarrance Group via landline and cell phone from Dec. 1-5, 2013, among 803 voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percent.

Read more from this story HERE.

White House: Obama Won’t Insist on Jobless Aid in Budget Deal

Photo Credit: Getty Images

Photo Credit: Getty Images

The White House will not insist that an emerging budget deal include an extension of the unemployment benefits program set to expire at the end of the year, press secretary Jay Carney said on Friday.

Carney said that it would be “terrible to tell more than a million families across the country just a few days after Christmas that they’re out of benefits,” but that the White House was agnostic on how the extension happened.

“The vehicle that they use to do that is less important than the fact that they do it,” Carney said.

The statement from Carney echoed House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who said Thursday that an extension of the jobless benefits did not have to be included in a budget deal to win Democratic support.

“Hopefully, it could be part of the budget, but it doesn’t have to be part of the budget,” Pelosi said. “It could be on its own vehicle, as it goes forward, but it’s something we must consider.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Unions Poised to Win Delay of ObamaCare Tax in Budget Deal

Photo Credit: majunznkLabor unions are poised to score the delay of an ObamaCare tax in the bipartisan budget deal emerging in the Senate.

The bargain under negotiation would make small adjustments to the healthcare law, including delaying the law’s reinsurance fee for one year. The three-year tax is meant to generate revenue that will stabilize premiums on the individual market as sick patients enter the risk pool.

The tax applies to all group health plans, but unions argue it will raise their healthcare costs while providing them no benefit.

The reinsurance tax figured prominently in discussions at a recent AFL-CIO convention, where workers passed a resolution demanding changes to ObamaCare.

The White House recently denied labor’s top priority on ObamaCare, ruling that union health plans are not eligible for the new subsidies because they are already helped by the tax code.

Read more from this story HERE.

Layoffs Coming to Cleveland Clinic in Plan to Reduce Budget by $330 Million (+video)

Photo Credit: tlillis4

Photo Credit: tlillis4

The Cleveland Clinic has told workers they will be laying off an unspecified number of employees as part of an overall, sweeping cost-reduction plan.

Clinic CEO Dr. Toby Cosgrove discussed the looming cuts and changes in a Wednesday morning all-employee meeting.

Clinic spokeswoman Eileen Sheil denied circulating rumors that employees were told there would be 3,000 jobs cut.

She said any layoffs will be part of a multi-year plan to cut $330 million from the Clinic’s budget.

The Clinic is the region’s largest employer with roughly 42,000 workers.

Read more from this story HERE.