At no cost to Taxpayers

This summer, the USS George H.W. Bush underwent maintenance for, among other things, repairs to the faulty Vacuum flush toilet "heads" that had sailors standing in line for hours, doing what some reporters called "the pee pee dance." At no cost to taxpayers, the repairs have been made. Washington Post reporter Al Kamen wrote:

The Navy is working to finally fix a chronic problem that has been bedeviling sailors aboard its newest aircraft carrier — clogged toilets.

Kamen linked to an earlier article by Michael Welles Shapiro of the Daily Press, a Virginia newspaper. Shapiro reported that special anti-snag devices had been installed in the toilet drainage lines that would prevent future clogs. He also reported:

EVAC has not charged the Navy for the work.

EVAC of North America Inc. headquartered in Cherry Valley, Ill. is the company that built the waste management system on the Bush and executed the repairs, which included reconfiguring the system to increase its capacity.

If I had become a sailor

If I had become a sailor, I might not have been retained by the ERB and I might be facing early dismissal. But, I'm not a sailor. If I had become a sailor, I might have been assigned to the USS George HW Bush's maiden voyage and I would have had to deal with the ship's malfunctioning heads. But, I'm not a sailor. If I had become a sailor, I know I would not have had the freedom to become a HANC for my mother. If you want to know more about what a HANC is, visit 37 Not-necessarily-easy-steps to become a Master HANC

Thoughts from others on the Navy

I thought I'd share the thoughts of some other people who had something to say about sailors and the Navy.

No man will be a sailor who has contrivance enough to get himself into a jail; for being in a ship is being in a jail, with the chance of being drowned... a man in a jail has more room, better food, and commonly better company.

Samuel Johnson

The Ancient Mariner would not have taken so well if it had been called The Old Sailor.

Samuel Butler

The Marine Corps is the Navy's police force and as long as I am President that is what it will remain. They have a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin's.

Harry S. Truman

Sailors Against ERB

Sailors Against ERB is a group on Facebook that is trying to help make sense of the early release from contracts for almost 3,000 sailors. Recently, it posed the question:

Is anyone being required by their command to get their Warfare Device? The pin will only help the command numbers, not a sailor being ERB'd out. I know a sailor that has been told if they don't they will receive a bad separation eval. Is this happening to you or someone else you know? I'm sure Captain (Steve) Holmes (director, Military Community Management at Navy Personnel Command) would like to know the commands names....

A Warfare Device is an official insignia that is added to a uniform.

One responder said: Surely you aren't implying that ERB'd sailors should stop meeting requirements of their current job... That only stands to HURT any chances they have to a reversal of the decision to separate them.

Others responded with:

why should anyone getting seperated out really care. the navy is a cooperation not a branch of the military anymore of which is ran by a bunch of idiots. Who really wants to stay at a place that doesn't care about them anymore. We are being punished for be to close to retirement so officers and E-9 can get their full retirement. I will be glad not to be apart of all this crap anymore.

and

In my command if you don't have it after 18 months of being on Sea Duty then you should get a counseling chit every month there after until you get it, because it's required to challenge other people in the same rank for evals. They haven't said anything about getting a bad eval upon separation. But honestly it didn't help me in my situation when I got ERB'D so I don't see the use of it anymore.

One responder said:

Im Dual qualed and the only E-5 in my division dual qualed and I am getting ERB'd. So I dont see how it helps anyone compete with anyone else. I would still get the pins though because its one of the only things the navy cant take away from you and it looks good on the uniforms.

Another countered with:

Your warfare pins can get taken away. They don't do it much anymore but that is a real kick in the face. COs used to do it at mast instead of busting you down. I don't think anyone getting out this summer should be forced to do anything but prepare to look for other opportunities.

Sailors deployed on the USS George HW Bush have been informed they can be taken to Captain's Mast for relieving themselves in places other than the ship's heads. In Novem1, the heads were locked in an ownership experiment of the few working heads on the aircraft carrier. As soon as the media ran the truth of the story, the cipher locks were reset and sailors were free to use whatever facilities they could find that worked. The world's most modern and most expensive aircraft carrier isn't scheduled to be upgraded until May 2012.

One sailor said:

It is mandatory in the Navy. However, who cares about a bad separation eval? Honestly, most employers have no idea what the stuff on an eval means. This is just poor leadership trying to beef up their numbers. Its all about the FITREPs. Its all about "Equal Opportunity" (ie picking less qualified officer candidates because of gender/race). This is what Big Navy is coming to. The ball can't be stopped from rolling down the hill. I'd tell the Sailor not to get the pin.

The devices cost from $2.55 to $15 apiece.

A sailor who was was told the Enlistment Retention Board had decided to release him or her from the Navy's contract early has placed a positive spin on this.

I'm gonna use my warfare qualifications on my resumes and bring it up during Job interviews. "I have my information dominance and surface pins before i was ERB'd out, so I'm exactly what this company needs"

What the Navy has done to thousands of sailors, many of whom did not deserve it, is similar to what has been done to millions of civilians for many years - the only difference is these sailors are active-duty military. Tax-payers fund the military.

What's next?

Ninety-nine percent times three

They don't understand When I was a child, my grandmother said, "Everybody has an opinion. Everybody has an _ _ _ hole, too. Ninety-nine percent of the time, they are only good for the one who has them and usually, they both stink." Many years later, a woman I worked with told me, "A person's perception is ninety-nine percent of reality." A few months ago, I posted another reference to ninety-nine percent, when I quoted someone who stated that ninety-nine percent of our nation's population is protected by the one percent who comprise the military. I have an opinion about some members of the military who have a skewed sense of reality, based on their perception. You see, in November 2011, I started a blog called It's not a Sailor's Life for Me because I wanted to bring attention to conditions aboard the USS George HW Bush on its maiden deployment. As a taxpayer, I was appalled to learn that my son and almost 6,000 other sailors on the United States' most modern aircraft carrier had been enduring more than five months with malfunctioning toilets, or, in military lingo - heads. Like most sailors who had been deployed, he said nothing; he manned-up and dealt with what was much more than a minor inconvenience. For almost half a year, they all dealt with the VCHT that did not vacuum, contain, hold or transfer as the system had been intended. Sadly, the ship had these problems upon delivery. Five months at sea, thousands of man hours attempting to repairjavascript:void(0); and maintain the system and yet, the ordeal continued. As unfortunate as it was that the heads weren't functioning, the sailors received orders that they were only allowed to relieve themselves in the heads - the ones they could find that did work - and if they opted to do otherwise, they could be subject to being called to Captain's Mast. That was when locks were allowed to be placed on the doors to heads that did work. Locks. On the doors to working toilets. On a ship that is larger than many small towns. Locks on doors to heads that only some could access and orders to use only the working heads. Not long after I started my blog, two Virginia newspapers picked up the story and not long thereafter, media outlets worldwide linked to those stories. It's a fact: in the Navy are "boat people" and "squadron people." It's also a fact that my son is one of the squadron people. I get it. They are rivals on the same team, if you can believe it. The boat's company spend much more time on the ship than do the squadron's company. It's almost like having a cousin who comes to visit from time to time, but doesn't live in your home. I get it. I really do. What I don't get, however, is why those who "live" on the ship didn't rejoice when the combinations to the locks were reset to a common default. Would you have your cousin, even the one you don't like much, visit and then lock him out of the one room with working toilets? Instead, they create cartoons meant to insult, leave them on car windshields of squadron members and then say, "You're not going to tell him, are you?" My son sent me the photo, linked above, and said he found it amusing that they are still focused on him, rather than on fixing the toilets. Of course, the ones with the cartoons probably have working toilets. The VHCT system on the ship isn't scheduled to undergo repairs until May. In my opinion, that is far too long for tax payers to support our active military to wait for properly working toilets. My reality, based on my perceptions, is that my blog made a difference - good or bad - it made a difference to at least 1% of 1% of the sailors on board the Bush. The locks were opened and the captain said he will recommend an upgrade. That's all I wanted.

Stars in the Navy

On Feb. 2, 2012, NavyTimes.com reported a change in federal law to provide higher retention rates for “top brass” with the purpose of keeping military leaders active longer.

Prior to the law change, an officer’s retirement pay was based on 26 years of service. Today, a four-star officer with 43 years of service can retire with more than double the $134,400 four-star officers received a year ago. Active-duty officers’ lifestyles are boosted further with housing allowances and other compensation.

Perhaps most officers deserve these remunerations; however if their rewards are at the expense of the morale of the enlisted personnel they lead, something is tragically wrong with the system.  Some believe the increased pension payment may not entice senior officers to remain in the military, but younger officers might choose to remain active longer, hoping to reap the payoff when they retire after more than 26 years.

The Project on Government Oversight, which looks at waste in government, suggests these pensions are extreme. Nearly 150 three-star officers and 44 four-star officers currently receive the higher pensions.

“At a time when the Pentagon is struggling to pay for the men and women who actually fight wars, and is shrinking the size of its fighting force and civilian employees, it doesn’t make sense to nearly double the size of a retired four-star’s pension,” said Nick Schwellenbach, director of investigations for the group.

The Facebook group, Sailors Against ERB  asks, “Did our sailors get fired so we could pay these guys more than double what their pension used to be?”

In November 2011, the Enlisted Retention Board informed nearly 3,000 sailors their active contracts will terminate on September 1, 2012. One tenth of those “ERB sailors” will take advantage of the early 15-year retirement option recently approved by Congress. Many of the remaining sailors are concerned with the quota game being played by “Big Navy.”

They want to know why they were selected to be involuntarily separated from their military careers, despite what their superiors called excellent work performance, especially when they know other sailors who had openly expressed regret at being retained.
They feel betrayed.

According to another NavyTimes article, “Some sailors who volunteered for early outs were turned down; others with less-than-stellar records were able to escape because their ratings and year groups were safe. Some of those losing their jobs will be eligible by a matter of days (to retire at 15 years) and miss out on as much as $950,000 over the course of their lifetimes.”

Meanwhile, high-ranking officers receive raises and incentives to remain on active duty. Our military requires strong leadership, but not at the expense of our enlisted personnel, the backbone of the military.

1,000 Veterans to March on the White House

Adam Kokesh is a controversial figure - probably because he isn't a sheep, bleeting and following along behind those who would try to make him fit into a role that does not fit.  He challenges authority and reveals the reality of a government based not on protecting the freedoms of the American people. He believes his experience as a former Republican Congressional candidate and member of the USMC qualifies him to encourage everyone to live as free, dignified humans and he urges everyone to live as if government does not exist. He is Adam of Adam VS the Man.

Adam versus the Man is more than a cable or Internet show, it's his way of life. His Facebook page states:

Who is “the man?” The man is anyone who thinks they can tell you how to live your life and impose their will on others by force of government. But maybe the man behind the curtain is the would-be man in all of us. Because really, the message of freedom that this show is based on, is about conquering that desire to rule over others and that willingness to accept rule by force. They are temptations all are subject too, but in order to establish true liberty for humanity, we must condemn all forms of freedom-violating initiation of force against others and embrace the love and respect for our shared humanity of which we are all capable.

His current press release follows:

1,000 Veterans to March on the White House for Ron Paul, Organizers Overwhelmed
Thousands expected to turn their backs on Obama for "RON PAUL IS THE CHOICE OF THE TROOPS"

    It's only been up for a couple weeks, but according to the Facebook event page, which just passed 1,250 "going" this past Friday, Veterans for Ron Paul 2012 are going to be an undeniable presence in Washington, DC on President's Day. The organizers have been overwhelmed by the positive response, much of which is from veterans and active duty troops who are hearing Ron Paul's message for the first time because of this event. Many passionate veterans are even coming from as far away as the west coast, and almost every other post on the wall for the event page is a request or offer for long-distance transportation. Emails to organizers have also indicated that there will be a large contingent of active duty troops in the formation who have declined to RSVP publicly on Facebook. However, organizers are realistic about the numbers, as former US Marine and Fallujah combat veteran Adam Kokesh said, "We know 1,250 on Facebook includes some supporters who won't be there, but we think it's a reasonable goal now to have 1,000 veterans in the formation."

    On President's Day, February 20th, 2012, the founders of Veterans for Ron Paul 2012, Nathan Cox and Adam Kokesh, will lead a formation of veterans and active duty troops who support Ron Paul's candidacy for President of the United States from the Washington Monument to the White House. Upon arrival at the White House, they will do an about face and render a hand salute to a folded American flag. They will hold the salute for as many seconds as troops have died under the Presidency of Barrack Obama, including suicides.

    The purpose of this event is to make it clear to the American people that Ron Paul is the choice of the troops and the candidate who will have the greatest support from those he would lead as commander-in-chief. This is already evidence(d) by the fact that Ron Paul has received more campaign contributions from active duty service members than all other presidential candidates combined, INCLUDING Barrack Obama. The troops want a President who is going to be decisive, put America's security first, and only send them into harm's way with a clear moral imperative. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who even comes close to meeting those criteria.

    Any active duty service members who join will be invited to march at the front of the formation. Proof of service will be required to march in the formation for all current or former military personnel. Family members are invite(d) to march behind the formation and supporters are encouraged to line the route of the march and be present for the ceremony at the White House.

For more information about this event, please contact Veterans for Ron Paul 2012 at VFRP2012@gmail.com or see the facebook event at:

http://www.facebook.com/events/create/?eid=192677970828185

To see the first official announcement of this event:
http://youtu.be/v0LxI7_v9vA

I don't typically involve myself in politics because I believe our system if flawed and based on an antiquated electoral college. There comes a time, however, when everyone must ask the question:" if not me, then who; if not now, then when?"

I have to do my part or my freedoms mean nothing.

In 1946, Congress created the Board for Correction of Naval Records as a means for Sailors and Marines to correct injustices in their military records, which impact future jobs and retirement benefits.

In November, nearly 3,000 Sailors, who were still under contract with the United States Navy, were informed that their services were no longer required by their country - more precisely by the organization/corporation acting on behalf of their country. These sailors are still in shock over the news from the Enlistment Retention Board and the stigma attached with the perception that something was wrong with their performance. Despite recent re-enlistments, many sailors with 7 to 15 years of service will be denied the chance to fulfill their dreams of a career in the Navy. Many will be denied the option to serve out their current contracts. They are simply being "let go" or downsized.

Many sailors have stated they do not fit the stated criteria outlined by the ERB. Sailors Against ERB and Navy ERB Sailors are two Facebook pages are dedicated helping sailors and their families not only cope with this decision, but to fight for the right to retire as planned or have their records restored.

Sailors Against ERB urges:

There are THREE things that EVERY ERB sailor must do ASAP!
1. Write both your senators & US Representative.
2. File a BCNR. 3. File an IG grievance.
If you have any questions on how to do any these or if you want a template to get you started on writing your congressmen, write me at sailorsagainsterb@yahoo.com.

Many news outlets are eager to speak with ERB sailors or their families. Check with your local newspaper or television news anchor to see if there is any interest in covering your story.

• Why does the Navy no longer need the service of the skilled men and women who have faithfully served their country for at least 7 years? 
• Why was this method chosen to downsize the Navy, rather than seeking volunteers at any level in the over-manned rates? 
• Why not allow these sailors the option to retire early? 
• Where is the money that was being set aside to cover the pensions of these sailors?
• Why does the Navy not make it clear that those who must leave involuntarily are not trouble-makers or miscreants?

All these gifts and it's not even my birthday - yet

It's not quite the light at the end of the tunnel, but the Navy has announced it plans to offer voluntary early retirement to certain Sailors who must separate from the military due to the recent decisions of the Enlisted Retention Board (ERB).

The Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) is a temporary program that offers eligible members with 15 to 20 years of active service the option of  voluntary, early retirement at a reduced monthly stipend.

According to the official website of the Navy,

Sailors who will have completed at least 15 years of active service as of Sept. 1, 2012, and who were not selected for retention by the ERB, will be eligible for early retirement benefits under TERA.

Eligible Sailors who desire early retirement under TERA must submit an application. As TERA is not an entitlement, all eligible members must apply to receive benefits, and all applications may not necessarily be approved. Detailed application procedures will be promulgated in a future NAVADMIN. Eligible Sailors who wish to apply for TERA will have their ERB results held in abeyance to facilitate their application for voluntary retirement.

Sailors whose TERA application is approved will be retired voluntarily no later than Sept. 1, 2012, and will not be entitled to involuntary separation pay (ISP). However, Sailors will remain qualified for enhanced ERB transition benefits until their retirement date.

This news won't brighten the days of those sailors with 14 years, 11 months and 29 days of service, but it is potentially good news for those who have served one day longer.

There is more information about the Enlisted Retention Board, visit the ERB site or call 1-866-U-ASK-NPC. 

On another note, Congress has dropped SOPA and PIPA - for now. Thirteen million Americans chose Jan. 18 to tell their elected officials to protect free speech rights on the Internet, while the world watched. Major sites were blacked out and we learned how much we might be missing if legislation passed that would, in effect, censor much of what we have come to expect from our Internet over the past 10 years or more.

This unprecedented grassroots activism may have changed the way people fight for the public interest and basic rights.

Two of my three elected officials responded to my emailed concern.

One told me, among other things:

I, and many others, have some very serious and legitimate concerns about SOPA, the way it is written, and its broad implications. Intended or not, the implications of SOPA as it was introduced in the House can be far beyond what its advocates say is the intent. SOPA needs to be subject to extensive Congressional hearings so that all of its implications can be fully understood by everyone. This is a perfect example of why legislation should not be rushed through Congress. . . .


SOPA was introduced out of a concern that an increasing number of overseas-based websites are selling or making available pirated intellectual property, which is a violation of U.S. intellectual property laws. There are already processes in place to handle U.S. based websites that violate intellectual property rights. But if these websites are operating overseas, U.S. individuals and companies who are having their property stolen and misused do not have judicial recourse to shut them down or force them to pay back the profits they've made off of the stolen property. Movies are one example of property that is often stolen and then streamed from an overseas location. I think we need to continue to look at how this concern might be addressed, but SOPA as introduced in the House went far beyond addressing that issue and created a host of problems, even for inadvertent violations.

The other wrote:

As you may be aware, on May 12, 2011, Senator Patrick Leahy (VT) introduced the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (PROTECT IP/ PIPA, S. 968), which is meant to curb the online theft of intellectual property, much of which is occurring through rogue websites overseas in China. As a senator from Florida, a state with a large presence of artists, creators and businesses connected to the creation of intellectual property, I have a strong interest in stopping online piracy that costs Florida jobs. It was with this in mind that I was previously a co-sponsor of the PROTECT IP Act. I believe it's important to protect American ingenuity, ideas and jobs from being stolen through Internet piracy. However, we must do this while simultaneously promoting an open, dynamic Internet environment that is ripe for innovation and can promote new technologies.

 

Last summer, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the bill unanimously and without controversy. Since then, I've heard from a number of Floridians who have raised legitimate concerns about the impact this bill could have on Internet access, as well as a potentially unreasonable expansion of the federal government's authority to impact the Internet. Congress should listen and avoid rushing through a bill that could have many unintended consequences.

 

Therefore, I have decided to withdraw my support for the PROTECT IP Act. Furthermore, I have encouraged Majority Reid to abandon his plan to rush the bill to the floor. Instead, we should take more time to address the concerns raised by all sides, and come up with new legislation that addresses Internet piracy while protecting free and open access to the Internet. Please know that I will remain mindful of your concerns should this, or similar legislation, such as the Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA, H.R. 3261), come before the Senate for consideration.

Maybe someone really is paying attention.

My final gift (for this week) arrives tomorrow in the form of  the online debut of Fragile House.

 

Sailors and the Internet

When my son first joined the Navy, we communicated through postal mail and phone calls throughout bootcamp, A-school and his first cruise. Over time, we have come to rely on the near-instant communication through email and more recently, I could see photos of his ship and shipmates while they were on deployment - thanks to Facebook.

I like the Internet for many other reasons, so when I learned about SOPA and PIPA, I knew I had to take action.

Tonight, I signed another online petition, this one is on Google and addresses two bills before Congress. 

Google, Wikipedia and other sites, as well as individuals have chosen to black out their sites for a day. Fight for the Future is the largest online protest in the history of the Internet.

According to Google:

Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.

Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.

The Senate will begin voting on January 24th. Please let them know how you feel. Sign this petition urging Congress to vote NO on PIPA and SOPA before it is too late.

I copied this and sent it to my elected officials:

Fighting online piracy is important. The most effective way to shut down pirate websites is through targeted legislation that cuts off their funding. There’s no need to make American social networks, blogs and search engines censor the Internet or undermine the existing laws that have enabled the Web to thrive, creating millions of U.S. jobs.

Too much is at stake – please vote NO on PIPA and SOPA

Here is where I found the email addresses for my representatives and senators.

Do you think online petitions don't work?

In 2007 Snopes debunked the idea that online petitions were worth the time it took to forward an email.

A misdirected petition is of no more use than an undirected one - though the voices it contains may be shouting, they won't be heard.

According to Snopes.com, the average e-petition isn't worth the pixels used to create it, but stated the popularity of online petitions comes from the instant sense of relief for people who otherwise feel helpless to impact the world or its policy makers.

A popular online petition site is change.org. It addresses concerns about the validity and potency of online petitions this way:

...what if you started to receive emails from each of your neighbors asking you to mow your lawn more often? Or, what if your company received thousands of emails from valued customers asking you to use a different supplier for your parts? How quickly would you act? That’s the unique thing about creating an online petition on Change.org: when you specify an email address for your target, each time a supporter signs your petition, an email is automatically sent directly to that person. Governments, companies and individuals value their reputations and feel accountable to their neighbors, constituents and customers. When hundreds or even thousands of emails arrive in their inboxes, the message is very hard to ignore.

iPetitions.com states:

Online petitions can be a very effective way of gathering support for a cause you care about and drawing attention to that cause. Many of our petition hosts have gathered tens and even hundreds of thousands of signatures on their petitions—petition recipients have had to stand up and take notice! To be truly effective in creating change, however, you need to be actively involved in promoting your petition.

Both sites emphasize the need for the petitioner to move beyond creating the document. If the petition is not promoted and promoted and promoted, it truly is worth no more than the pixels from which it came. Email, social networks and word of mouth are all necessary to make a petition take precedence when the emails do reach the inbox of the person working on behalf of the organization targeted for action. The sites also stress the importance of reaching out to officials through personal emails and even postal mail - yes, the old fashioned kind of mail that is written on paper and sent through the USPS inside an envelope, paid for with a postage stamp. Phone calls are also effective. If you wish to reach someone and draw attention to your concern, don't stop until you have exhausted all of your options.

The beauty of online petitions is that sometimes, the media picks up on these issues and runs a story. Sometimes, the media runs a story that leads to the petition. Often, if the issue affects enough people, these events run simultaneously.

Such is the case with the United States Navy and its enlisted personnel. Media knows, the sailors know and now, thanks to online petitioning and social networking, many more civilians know that during the final months of 2011,  two enlisted retention boards evaluated nearly 15,386 sailors ranked E-4 through E-8, who have served between seven and 15 years in 31 overmanned ratings. The week after Thanksgiving, 2,947 sailors learned they will be involuntarily separated from the Navy on Sept. 1, 2012.

Some have resigned themselves to finishing out their broken contracts, but many are outraged. They had planned their lives around retiring from the Navy after serving 20 years. Some bought homes after their most recent re-enlistments, certain they would retire and settle down in their current locations and expecting to receive military pensions and continued benefits for life. Instead, during the height of the holiday season, they discovered they have until the end of August to adjust to the idea of being a civilian , through the summer to attend classes and transition to a new way of life - and look for employment.

Sailors Against ERB is a Facebook community page that decided to create petitions online at change.org and on the WhiteHouse.gov site, hoping to impact the policy makers at what sailors call "Big Navy" and within our government. The group is taking the petitions straight to the Commander in Chief. The group is also encouraging the thousand or so members to share the word, spread the word, and talk the words to their families, friends, colleagues and elected officials. It even has links to the House of Representatives and Congress, as do I in a previous post.

Whether or not you believe in the cause of Sailors Against ERB, whether or not you believe in the power of online petitions and whether or not you decide to sign a petition, I urge you to find that within you that makes you want to take action and do so. Find a cause worth supporting and support it with all your being. Seek out that which brings you joy or riles you. Take steps to spread the joy or soothe the anger. Do something. Let people know where you stand. If you're not sure, come stand beside me. I tend to get things done!


  

Did Congress Steal Money from the Military Pension Trust Fund?

Sailors whose contracts have been broken, through recent decisions made by the Enlisted Retention Board, voice concerns that the entire process could have been handled differently and that their dismissal is not so much about over-manned jobs but in cutting back on benefits for those veterans who have earned them through years of sacrifice and dedication. 

Most sailors remain anonymous, while voicing their concerns on hundreds of blogs, forums and news outlets.

This ERB process is affecting the morale of everyone in the Navy and all are questioning their roles in the military. It has become painfully clear that this is only about saving on retirement by cutting out those who are intending to continue to make the Navy a career and retire with full benefits.

There may be truth in this. Two years ago, PR Newswire reported:

As of January 1, 2010, the amount of money owed to federal civilian and military pension trust funds passed the $1 trillion mark as Congress continues to loot all of the federal government's trust funds to pay for deficit spending.  More money is now owed by the federal government to these two funds than what is owed to China.

"In the future, little kids in kindergarten and their children will have to repay these funds," stated William H. Fruth, founder of the 10 Amendments for Freedom. "Those responsible for creating this massive, unconscionable debt will be dead and gone, not able to hear the howling curses directed toward them by those who will have to pay in the future," Fruth continued.

For the first three months of the 2010 fiscal year (October, November, and December), Congress borrowed more than $400 billion to pay for its deficits. Of this amount, Congress spent more than $65 billion of the money which is supposed to be in federal government workers' retirement funds.

A trust fund is like a savings account. Money is deposited into the fund to be spent another day, when it is needed. The Social Security Trust Fund is the best-known. However, Congress has spent all of the savings in all of its trust funds.

As of January 1, 2010, Congress had "borrowed" $295,792,000,000 from the Military Retirement Trust Fund. That's almost Three Hundred Billion. Imagine how much is missing two years later. At that time the Total National Debt was more than $12 Trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury.

According to the PR Newswire report, dated Feb 16, 2010:

Each month federal workers and the federal government make a deposit into retirement funds which are to be drawn upon when workers retire. However, Congress has spent all of the money in the Federal Civilian and Military Retirement Funds to pay for deficits. More than $1 trillion is now owed to just these two funds...

The 10 Amendments for Freedom is a movement to add ten specific amendments to the Constitution by way of an Article V. convention. Amendment One, Balanced Budget, will prevent Congress from spending the money in its funds and trusts.

For more information regarding the 10 Amendments for Freedom, go to http://www.10amendments.org.

According to NBC Sports:

...the Colts owe Peyton Manning another $28 million in early 2012.  Last month, Peter King pointed out during Football Night In America that the money comes due before the start of the 2012 league year.

That’s significant because it means that the Colts can’t trade Manning to a new team before the payment comes due. But that hasn’t completely put to rest speculation that the Colts will pay Peyton and then, once the league year begins, attempt to trade him.  Bob Kravitz’s latest item on the situation should completely put that speculation to rest.

I mention this, because this seems similar to what the Navy may be doing. It seems the Navy is replacing experienced, skilled, career-minded Navy personnel with younger, unproven sailors who have not yet shown their leadership qualities.

The article continues:

Kravitz, who covers the Colts for the Indianapolis Star, points out that, if the Colts pay Peyton and then trade him, the Colts will absorb a 2012 salary cap charge of $38.8 million.  And if the Colts trade Peyton Manning in 2013, the cap charge would drop to only $28.8 million.

Absent a willingness by Peyton to move the due date of his payment, a trade becomes impossible.  Thus, if Peyton tells the Colts “my contract is my contract,” they’ll have to cut him, or they’ll have to keep him for at least two more seasons. Although Peyton adroitly has avoided any discussion regarding the future, plans undoubtedly are being made.  There’s a good chance that the final plan already has been crafted, and that the only thing left to do is implement it.

If that’s the case, Archie Manning’s comments from Tuesday become even more significant.  Given that Archie caucused with Oliver Luck the night before Archie told FOX Sports Radio that he “doubts” Peyton and Andrew Luck want to be on the same team, it’s safe to assume that Oliver agrees with that sentiment.

 If you search online for “Navy ERB” you will find many forums where you can read the angst and anger from sailors and their families. Some of these sites were set up by Navy officials as a way to gauge the atmosphere of the personnel affected by the decision to downsize the Navy. They provide many statements, but few answers to sailors' questions, primarily "Why me?" and "Why not that other guy?"

You will find news reports attempting to link one sailor’s suicide with the news that he had been “let go,” and you will find two petitions requesting signatures due by Jan. 17, 2012 requesting our nation's Commander in Chief review the ERB process.

Linked directly to the White House, this petition is extremely time sensitive and vital to show support to our active-duty sailors. The petition on change.org is also provided by Sailors Against ERB, a site on Facebook that offers support and an outlet for the families and sailors who are grappling with a forced life change.

Sailors Against ERB was created to contact sailors affected by the ERB. The information states:

These sailors have held up their end up the contract and the government needs to do the same. These sailors need to have a voice and hopefully if it is loud enough, they will be heard!

Anyone wishing to write their Representatives  can find them here and those wishing to write their Senators can do so by clicking the link.

Time is of the essence. Be brief. Copy and paste, if you'd like:

I urge you to consider a review of the Navy's Enlistment Retention Board's recent decision to dismiss 2,947 sailors in a breach of contract that, were it reversed, could end in disciplinary action toward the enlisted personnel. Perhaps a more egalitarian process would involve requesting volunteers who want to separate with a severance package, ending new recruits in the over-manned areas, allowing sailors to cross-rate and granting retirement benefits to those sailors who have served and sacrificed for our country. Many sailors who have been dismissed are decorated veterans who, were they allowed to serve out the remainder of their contracts, would retire from the Navy they love. Who will lead the new recruits if not these old salts?

Would they do this to Tebow?

According to a petition to The White House:

The US Navy created an Enlisted Retention Board (ERB) in response to military downsizing. ERB reviewed service records of 15,386 sailors in "overmanned" rates with 7-15 years served and made decisions to involuntarily separate 2,947. These sailors need the respect they deserve and their contracts upheld by the government. Before involuntarily separating sailors the Navy should ask for volunteers who want to separate with a severance package, stop recruiting new sailors and let sailors cross-rate before breaching contracts with mid-career sailors.The severance package for the sailors is based on time served and doesn't include the time on remaining contract. Worst case, let them complete the remainder of their contract and early retire them so they can receive the benefits they earned.

 Sailors and their families are outraged. Please sign the petition (http://wh.gov/Dfy) to show your support for our military.

What the Navy is doing would be like hearing the Broncos tore up Tim Tebow's contract because there was another player they could hire for less with the promise of taking over Tebow's position. It's just not right!

The Navy's Quota-Based Enlisted Retention Board

Navy parents, spouses and friends do not like what is happening with our sailors who are affected by the Quota-Based Enlisted Retention Board. It hurts when dreams are dashed and plans are thwarted by down-sizing, regardless of the organization making the changes.

When our loved ones joined the Navy, their families also joined. We felt their pre-deployment jitters and even though we couldn't go with them, we felt every day of every deployment as keenly as they. While our family members were securing the seas, preparing for war and planning for peace, those left at home assumed their domestic duties. They sacrificed comfort and convenience; we sacrificed our time with those we cared most about. No longer able to discuss family matters or share jokes, we did what we could to "hold down our forts" without our helpmates.

Even Navy moms and dads felt a sense of loss with deployments. Parents have always suffered when their children struggled. The tears of our offspring stain our hearts, if  not our faces. As berthing and barracks filled with our sons and daughters, our nests emptied. Proud that our sailors were serving our country and protecting our rights, we lived vicariously through their journeys and we ached for them, when their careers adversely affected their relationships, sleep habits or living arrangements.

It's natural for the families of those sailors who have been involuntarily separated from the United States Navy to be outraged.

According to the Bureau of Naval Personell:

   UNPRECEDENTED RETENTION AND REDUCED ATTRITION RATES ACROSS THE NAVY HAVE  RESULTED IN A REQUIREMENT TO REBALANCE THE FORCE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS BOARD  IS TO REDUCE OVERMANNING IN RATINGS PROJECTED TO BE OVER 103% MANNED IN  FY-12.  REBALANCING OUR MANNING WILL IMPROVE ADVANCEMENT RATES AND INCREASE OPPORTUNITY FOR HIGH PERFORMING SAILORS TO RECEIVE IN-RATE REENLISTMENT  QUOTAS BY REDUCING THE STRAIN ON PERFORM TO SERVE.

The document states that personnel chosen for early separation are encouraged to apply for conversion to an undermanned rating.

  SAILORS SELECTED FOR CONVERSION WILL RECEIVE PCS ORDERS TO TRANSFER TO  A-SCHOOL OR TO FILL A VACANCY IN THEIR NEW RATING BY THE END OF FY -12.  APPLICATIONS FOR CONVERSION MUST BE RECEIVED BY 15 JUNE 2011 TO BE  CONSIDERED.

 These sailors are also encouraged to "affiliate with the Navy Reserve," according to the document; this is little relief to those sailors who joined the Navy with plans to retire with benefits after 20 years.

SAILORS SEPARATED BY THIS BOARD WILL HAVE ACCESS TO
THE NAVY'STRANSITION ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (TAMP),
PER REF L, WHICH PROVIDESEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE, RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE FOR SEPARATING MEMBERSSTATIONED OVERSEAS, AND
OTHER BENEFITS FOR MEMBERS WHO ARE INVOLUNTARILY SEPARATED.

SAILORS INTERESTED IN AFFILIATING WITH THE RESERVES MAY ALSO
TAKE ADVANTAGE OFTHE SERVICES OFFERED BY THE CAREER
TRANSITION OFFICE.

This knowledge is of little comfort to the families of sailors who will now have to join the hundreds of thousands of other unemployed people in a world of jobs that have already scaled back and are working skeletal crews.

THE DECISION TO CONDUCT THIS BOARD WAS MADE AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION  OF ALL OPTIONS FOR REBALANCING THE FORCE.  WE ARE COMMITTED TO RETAINING OUR  VERY BEST SAILORS WITH THE PROPER BALANCE OF SKILLS, SENIORITY AND EXPERIENCE  TO MEET THE NAVY CHALLENGES OF THE FUTURE. LEADERS AT ALL LEVELS MUST BE ENGAGED TO ASSIST SAILORS WITH CONVERSION AND  TRANSITION OPTIONS.

Best wishes to the sailors who have served faithfully, expecting to retire in a few years. You do have experience and skills to offer employees that many other candidates might not possess. Stay strong!

Sailors Deserve Better!

People join the military for many reasons. Some join for a sense of family; others, for a sense of belonging to something larger than themselves. They have said they wanted experience, while some hoped to travel. Expectant young fathers have wrestled for years over which is most important: marriage vows or military oaths. Years ago, the military was an option for troubled young men told by families or authorities they needed discipline. For generations, people have run to the service to get away from something, searching for something.

My father was drafted into service at the height of World War II and served a single four-year term. He had no interest in making the Army Air Corps his career. Fortunate that he never had to serve in the trenches, he felt he could provide for his family better as a civilian.

A little more than twenty years later, the United States Marine Corps drafted my oldest brother, who went from Parris Island to Vietnam. He finished his second term in North Carolina, then decided he didn't want to reenlist.

My youngest brother, who was born nineteen years after the Marine * yes, my parents populated the entire boomer generation* enlisted into the National Guard before deciding to make the military his way of life. He joined the Navy full time and retired after twenty years. My sister's husband also retired from the Navy. Numerous cousins also retired from military careers.

The next generation in my family has its share of military personnel, covering nearly every branch. Enlisting into service, they swore oaths and signed documents promising and expecting certain things from the contract. Sailors, as all military personnel, make many sacrifices and their families sacrifice much, to support their sailors. In November, more than 15,000 sailors and their families are outraged when they learned from the Enlisted Retention Board that they are being "involuntarily separated from the United States Navy."

Emily Anelli, a Proud Navy Wife insists It's not over for her sailor. She asks,

Why is it 2,947 sailors serving more than 7 and less than 15 years are suddenly being pushed out?

She's not the first Navy Wife to complain that her husband, halfway to retirement, is being denied that for which he has dutifully and faithfully sacrificed and proudly served.

I agree with Mrs. Anelli when she pleads:

It is only fair to let the 2,947 sailors finish their contracts. Honor the benefits they have worked so hard for, respect the work they have done and uphold the contract between the government and these sailors.

Mrs. Anelli states that her husband was approved for reenlistment December 2010 with a ceremony in January 2011. A year later, he learned that his service is no longer required. What changed? Why is it that the government suddenly finds him redundant? Why not allow him to complete his contract? If he had decided to opt out of his end of the contract he might be considered AWOL.

Can't we hold the government to the same standards to which it expects its personnel?  If the military chooses to dismiss members in the same way a corporation might dismiss employees during a downsize, what recourse do those members have when a contract is broken?

Our sailors deserve better. Let those who want to retire, do so. Give them their benefits, not a severance slip.

I find it interesting that this post is still the most viewed post of all time. In the two months my site has been active, my post about Guy Birenbaum's video has been viewed and linked to, more than any other post. Thanks for sharing!