Showing posts with label congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label congress. Show all posts

Thursday, February 9, 2012

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.

Monday, January 30, 2012

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?




Saturday, January 21, 2012

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.

 

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

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.

Sunday, January 15, 2012

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?








Sunday, December 4, 2011

Sailors Speak During Deployment

The U.S. Naval Institute has a great article about Operational Security and social media. Many fingers have pointed at me, casting blame and others have shamed me for writing about the flawed Vacuum Holding and Transfer System on the USS George HW Bush. Others praise me and laud my courage.

Despite opinion in some camps, my son and I discussed OPSEC and morale at great length before I initiated my blog. Thinking I was clever, I created a blog separate from my personal website, but the moment the Navy glommed onto my site, or perhaps the moment the Navy Times broke the story, someone searched my name and thus the anonymity was breached. I know the sources of visits on this and my other site. I tend to be just clever enough to get into mischief, it seems. He did not know about the blog until his commander showed him the printed page of the first few posts.

Still, he desired effect has been achieved. Cipher locks have been changed to a common unlock code so all hands can access working heads after pressing just three buttons. I feel, however that my main point has been overlooked by many who have picked up on this. Taxpayers, whether or not they have family on board the USS George HW Bush or any ship, deserve to know that our tax dollars are providing what we expect and what we have been told.

If you have followed this story, you may have read Capt. Luther's "recommendation for upgrades" to the "perfect system" on his ship.

I did not undertake this lightly. With a World War II father, brothers who served in Vietnam and Dessert Storm, nephews currently serving or recently returned from Afghanistan and Iraq and with my own son deployed, I take a strong, protective viewpoint toward all active-duty military and I want to know - as a taxpayer - that our fighting men and women have access to working heads at sea or some sort of back up system in place for potential failure of what was known prior to deployment, as a flawed, yet "perfect," system .

By now, it’s widely known what my son’s rank is and how long he has proudly served. I have never claimed to be, as one commenter on another site stated, the “ultimate Navy mom,” nor is my son, as others have posted, “a whiny little brat.” We take his service career very seriously. Since asking me to sign permission for his Delayed Enlistment Program, he has not asked for a single thing. However, when his men asked him to do something, he reached out and asked me to find a way to let them know someone cares more than they felt at that time.

It’s easy for folks at home to send shoe boxes to deployed personnel and then close their eyes at night, knowing they have "made a difference." Sending letters and cards to “any soldier” or “any sailor” is almost effortless, but actually listening when those deployed men and women have voiced concerns – with cause – about their basic human need to find a working head, and then doing something about it was not an easy choice for me.

Here is U.S. Naval Institute article in a nutshell, but I recommend you read the entire article and check if you feel inclined, leave a comment there:

The ability for service members while deployed to keep in contact with their family is exponentially greater than it ever has been in the annals of history.
The conversation turns to what life is REALLY like while deployed. It’s not fun–I mean it can be, it is an adventure and most of the people you’re deployed with are good people.

But, there is a reason why less than 1% of the United States has served in uniform–It’s hard and you have to put up with a lot. In describing such a life, I think I have had to be the most careful with my Mom. There’s nothing wrong with this, nor am I saying that my Mom is one to over react, or over-worry about things. Rather, from my point of view, I don’t want to say anything to her that would make her worry more for her son.

Now, I think that yeoman is at least as savvy as my own son, who refused to tell me how bad the head situation was until after more than 5 months at sea - only after his men asked for some sort of sign that someone cared about them. Sometimes, it truly is best for families, especially mothers, not to know what goes on.

What makes it so difficult to describe the life we live is that outside of the context defined by the skin of a ship, it is hard to have the right perspective on what is actually going on. Regardless of how well I articulate that context, it tends to be something that one HAS to experience.
There has been no need for what can loosely be termed as ‘communications training’ for service members beyond OPSEC and INFOSEC, because the amount of time service members could possibly spend communicating with their families was very brief, and the odds of getting into things that could cause tumult ashore was small.
He believes my site may have changed things.
It’s a helluva situation, and I have to stop short of saying that a Sailor’s Mom was wrong for what she did.

Things like this with Sailor’s families is not altogether rare, either. Being a Yeoman, you open much of the mail that comes to the Ship. Some of that mail is from the United States Congress asking about a letter or phone call they received from a Sailor or their family.
The only site that has referred more traffic here than U.S. Naval Institute is Information Dissemination, a site that lambasted my efforts to communicate my frustration as a taxpayer.

I have become, to some, the Blogging Mommy and to others, the mother of That Sailor, both titles I wear proudly. If my blog helped my son become THAT SAILOR who helped unlock the doors to working heads for the sailors on the USS George HW Bush, I think I deserve a Bravo Zulu for my blog.

The fact that my son is on this ship is not the point, but taxpayers may not have known of the locked heads otherwise. He had gone through the chain of command, as had many others on board the ship. He never asked me to create the blog - it was not his idea. I thought my blog was an effective way for me to vent personally. I had no idea the government and military would actually be the ones to bring it to the attention of the press on my behalf - in a very roundabout way.

Many media outlets discover what gets the attention of the military and the government. Apparently my blog sparked such interest. The press picked this story up and ran with it, which helped to achieve the desired effect and ciphers were reset to a common decode so all hands had access to working heads.

Our enlisted men and women deserve to have someone speak out for them – especially about their basic human rights. I just want to be sure the system is not only running properly, but that there are backups in place for the next long term deployment.

Someone commenting on this story on another site suggested sending the engineers responsible for the system's installation and warranty out on the ship for a week. Feed and give them all they can drink. The idea is that before the week is over, the problem will be resolved.

Could I have done this differently? Absolutely.
Could I have done this more effectively? Possibly.
Would I do it again for other military personnel? Definitely!