What People Think
 |
 |
68% For, 32% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 690, To amend title 10, United States Code, to reduce the minimum age for receipt of military retired pay for non-regular service from 60 to 55 (21 comments ↓)
H.R. 690 would amend title 10, United States Code, to reduce the minimum age for receipt of military retired pay for non-regular service from 60 to 55.
()
Learn More
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_HR_690.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Robert Potter
The fact of the matter is reserve personnel are at a disadvantage compared to their active counterparts on retirement pay. Pay is weighted based on the days a member is on duty, less days equals lower retirement pay. Personally, I served 9 1/2 years active duty before joining the National Guard ranks. The reality of National Guard service is that; 1 weekend a month and 2 weeks a year are not indicative of today's reservist commitment, especially if involved in a leadership capacity for these units, regardless of whether at war or not. 20years of military service, honorable and to the benefit of the nation, should be immediately recompensed, regardless of Active Duty, or Reserves. The retirement pay of reservist's is already penalized by a much lower amount (rightfully so) because they have not been serving in a full time status. Please consider making the retirement pay effective upon the actual retirement, and not 60years old as the current policy allows for.
Les Carmean
I agree with having a reduced pension upon retirement but all other benefits and rights, including health care should be on parity with active forces. You can end up just as dead or wounded on an active duty tour as the regular forces. This type of amendment has been around for some years, our friends in Congress believe it will cost too much to drop the age to 55.
Lar
Guard and Reserve members are the only federal employees who must wait until age 60 to draw full retirement benefits. DoD is shortchanging the members of the Guard and Reserve and their families by refusing to support lowering the earliest Guard and Reserve retirement age from 60 to 55.
DoD clearly views this as a "dollars-and-cents" matter, not wanting to spend more money on retirees. Furthermore, DoD has successfully deferred this issue by calling for studies, delaying action, and seeking to bury the entire matter in dishonest, intentionally confusing rhetoric.
Today nearly half of all service members who are executing the War on Terrorism and serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are reserve component members. While these members are proud to serve and to defend the interests of this nation, it is time that DoD be prevented from continuing to abuse these members. It is time for Congress to step in and mandate that DoD provide them with an equitable retirement.
swl
Get a life! When you begin drawing pay at age 60, and add on the value of Tricare, you're talking about big bucks over your remaining lifetime (plus sbp for your spouse) - without having the burdens experienced by active duty members of (1) moving with every change of orders and (2) having to rely only on their military retirement - not that from a job you've been able to hold for many years. Nobody's making you stay, so be thankful for what you're going to receive.
Keith
I would bet swl is not going to receive a retirement check from the Guard or Reserves. We in the Guard typically serve MORE than 20 years. I myself have over 14 years TAFMS and 25 total years. 3 deployments to OEF and OIF in 5 years with no complaints from me. I should get my retirement earier than 60. Maybe you should get a life.
DJSailor
There are no more Reserves, just part time Active Duty (which has its own concerns). swl has an issue with not moving with every change of orders. Drilling in DC was not fun while I lived in FL. Not having to rely on only my Military Retirement does not compensate me for the time spent away from family and work due to traveling for drills and annual training.
jdl
swl is clearly an immature individual.
With 14 years in the AD AF after 4 years in the Army Reserve, and now in the Air Guard, I can tell you from personal experience that service in the Guard/Reserve (G/R) is a greater sacrifice than serving on AD, especially today. GWOT, OIF, OEF are being conducted with nearly 50% of the total force coming from the G/R. Also, his position that G/R have a civilian pension to fall back on in addition to a military pension shows he's clearly never worked in the civilian sector. If he did he'd know that there’s no such thing. He’ll have greater security in retirement than any Guardsman or Reservist could ever hope to.
As far as PCSing on a regular basis, sure it's a pain in the butt. It's also one of the principal reasons people join the military so quit whining about it and enjoy the opportunities a new duty station offers.
Finally, get educated before you post uninformed opinions that expose you for the ignorant ass you are.
Joseph
Lowering age for G/R 60-55 is long over due.
Paul
I agree that the minimum age to recieve retiremnt pay for Guard and Reserve members should be lowered. I have been a member of the Air National Guard for 13 years, with 6 years AD. There are two reasons I strongly recommend the lowering. One, as mentioned above, the utilization of G/R forces is extensive with most members that I know of having spent at least one or more years in support of OIF, OEF, & GWOT. Clearly, the G/R have been tasked heavily in recent years. Yet, you'll find most consider it an honor to serve their country; certainly I do. Second, this is not the same G/R of the 80's, when one weekend a month and 2 weeks annually was pretty much status quo for duty. As mentioned by Robert Potter above, today's G/R can expect to pull more frequent duty, especially at higher ranks. The military has so much training that one weekend does not cut it any longer. I strongly urge lowering the min age of recieving retirment pay.
Tim
All great comments (except swl), but I'm wondering if H.R. 690 has died in committee. The tepid half-measure of addressing the reserve retirement issue under(S. 648) introduced by Sen Chambliss seems to be more popular in Congress at this moment. Anyone know where these are headed?
Robin
I wish someone would light a fire under the House Armed Services Committee. The Bill was referred to them on 1 February 2007. I am sorry that swl has a chip on his shoulder but many of us have PCS'd, been ordered to locations without our families, and have been proud to do it. I have a total of 30 years of service with more than 20 years of retirement points. It would be a blessing to have retirement income and medical benefits before I turn 60. SWL, try to find employment and medical insurance after you have served as long as I have. Semper Fi
Joe Harrington
I'm a USAR member that has deployed several times. I am working on my 22 plus years of service. This isssue has been challeged since title 10 was written. It's been stopped for numerous selfish reasons, mainly cost. The House Armed Services Committee needs to view & approve this regardless of potential cost. Myself an all other soldiers have earned it. Finally, this is the sad part. A large number of reservist never draw their first retirement check.
JimH
I have a total of over 17 years active--4 years enlisted in the navy, and 13 as an officer in the army. I could complain that I didn't get locked in at 18, but the most equitable plan I've heard is based on "good years". Unfortunately for me, I only have a total of 22 good years, but I would be happy to get my retirement at age 59. I belive if you've gotten 30, you should be able to retire at 55.
Alan
As usual, Congress and DoD will sit on this until it dies. I served a total of 26 years, both on AD and in the reserves. Perhaps, we need a letter-writing campaign to Congress. All current and former reservists and guard members, and every member of their families would get the point across. During my time in the reserves, I never spent less than a month on active duty in any given year. Most years, it was 6 weeks or more. I also seldom spent less than 2 weekends a month, and during my last few years 3 or 4. I was, and am, proud of my service, and my country, but it would have been a better indication of my country's gratitude to have received the retirement pay a little earlier.
Walt
I've had 5 years active service, 2 years as a traditional guard member and 25 years as a military Techician (civil service). We are required to wear the uniform. We do every thing are counter parts do in the active service and cannot get our retirement untill the age 60. It's about time that the retirement age is reduce to 55.Congress needs to wake up. Don't get me wrong.I am proud to wear the uniform and serving my country. The guard and reserves are being called upon more for deployments, homeland security,etc. God bless all the men and women in uniform and all congresspersons who support lowering the retirement to 55.
Denise
I served 9 yrs AD and 15 in the reserves and, I totally agree that they need to lower that age. Many of us sure could use now what we earned years ago. There are many of our soldiers who are not even alive to see it. I hope I am.
Micky
I have little faith in congress to pass this bill. There are not enough guard/reserve in any given district to impress a congressman. I think most non-reserve/guard people just do not care about this. Besides, if it did pass in a democratic party controlled congress, Bush would veto it anyway. Guys, do what I plan to do. Stay in till you're 60 anyway.
michael shell
PASS THIS BILL. it is way over due. being an active member of the guard. By the end of next year i will have spent over three of the past 5 years away from my home and job. we have soldiers with 12 years plus getting out since they have to wait (some close to 20 years to start drawing retirement. We are losing alot of experience that is needed over there. the incentives up front for enlistment is fine but these troops are doing the minimum required and then getting out..taking the money and run. I fel someone who has committed their life to the military deserves something too. Again i urge congress to pass this bill
duke
i spent two tours in nam,the gulf war and 28 years total active &reserves.and i believe we should get our retire pay at 55.and swl should get a life
Joe
This bill has been sitting on the desks of the Armed Forces Services then forward to Military personnel quit some time now.
This bill needs to get moving and passed for several reasons. 1)This would help to free up some slots for younger people to move into while those holding those is waiting to reach age 60 to start drawing retirement pay. 2) We Gray Area Retirees’ need this because we are getting older and our government is waiting for us to die off before receiving this benefit that is due to us so our government won't have to pay. 3) We was there for our government both state and federal when they needed us now we need our government to be there for us.
We Gray Area Retirees’ need you support and help to get this bill moving and passed instead of collecting dust.
If our government can give foreign aid to countries then they can pass this bill because it is our tax dollars going out the window when your tax dollars can stay at home and be some help to the economy.
Rick
Freedom in this country comes at a cost. The men and women who serve in the Guard and Reserve have earned their retirement and should not have to wait so long. What would life be like in this country if we had no Guard or Reserve to be there in time of need.