Do you think the 2.3% military pay raise will pass?

2015-06-12T13:57:25-04:00

WASHINGTON -- Congress sent strong messages through two votes Thursday that it plans to give troops a higher pay raise in the coming year, but lawmakers are still divided on just how much.
The full House approved a 2.3 percent raise as part of its annual defense spending bill. Meanwhile, a Senate committee approved a 1.3 percent increase in its version of the legislation, which still faces debate on the chamber floor.
Personnel costs have become a battleground as Congress, the Pentagon and White House look for ways to reduce defense spending and federal debt. Troops have seen their raises capped at 1 percent over the past two years.
"We cannot risk having an underfunded military during these uncertain times, and our troops deserve unfailing support as they lay their lives on the line," Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said in a release.
The House 2.3 percent raise, passed 278-149 in its massive defense appropriations bill, is above the White House's proposal earlier this year for a modest increase to 1.3 percent.
The bill also rejects cuts to military housing allowances and commissaries.
Earlier this week, the Obama administration threatened to veto the House appropriations bill. The Office of Management and Budget wrote that "it is imperative to slow the growth of basic pay and housing allowances, modernize military healthcare, and reform how commissaries operate."
The Pentagon has urged the cuts as well, saying ballooning costs for personnel and benefits are squeezing its readiness.
The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday agreed with the White House proposal on troop pay increases. It passed a draft version of the annual defense spending bill that included the 1.3 percent raise.
But senators also balked at cuts to commissaries.
The committee approved an amendment sponsored by Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., reversing $322 million in cuts to the worldwide chain of base grocery stores.
"At a time when thousands of military families depend on food stamps, it's wrong to reduce access to commissaries or increase costs at the checkout line. These families face enough stress," Mikulski said in a release.
The Senate will likely have a floor vote on the bill in the coming weeks, and the raise and changes to benefits will be up for debate again. The House and Senate appropriations bills must be merged into a final plan for funding the Defense Department. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/06/12/congress-signals-higher-pay-raise-for-troops.html?comp= [login to see] 70&rank=1

Congress Signals Higher Pay Raise for Troops

Congress sent strong messages through two votes Thursday that it plans to give troops a higher pay raise in the coming year.

Response by SrA Johnathan Kropke made Jun 12 at 2015 2:01 PM

2015-06-12T14:01:42-04:00

This I am unsure of, hopefully it does. No one really knows what our congressmen are really thinking.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 12 at 2015 2:02 PM

2015-06-12T14:02:00-04:00

I'm not sure why they don't just tie the % increase to the consumer price index and be done with it, that way they aren't passing laws every year regarding pay.

If the index is 1.8%, the pay increase is 1.8%. If it's 12%, the pay is 12%. If things get horribly out of whack, then you pass a "supplementary law" to adjust fire.

Although I realize there are "budgetary constrictions" inside the Army Clause, setting a Standardized Pay Scale doesn't violate the letter nor intend of that, since that is an "individualized" vice "collective" issue. No one cares how much a PFC makes, they care how much the "total Army" makes.

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Jun 12 at 2015 2:28 PM

2015-06-12T14:28:23-04:00

No, and it shouldn't. Sorry, but we are still in an economic recovery where people are just now beginning to get back on their feet. Let's keep the government costs to a minimum and, if anything, boost VA benefits and maintain retirement plans.

Response by SSG Donald Mceuen made Jun 12 at 2015 3:59 PM

2015-06-12T15:59:55-04:00

By the time they get threw with it it well be .5 if lucky.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Jun 12 at 2015 4:05 PM

2015-06-12T16:05:07-04:00

They will probably settle on a 1% raise for us....and pocket their pay by the additional 1.3% to themselves.....

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jun 12 at 2015 7:21 PM

2015-06-12T19:21:33-04:00

Not even close. Even the GOP are endorsing military pay and benefit cuts now...

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jun 12 at 2015 7:28 PM

2015-06-12T19:28:10-04:00

I think the pay percentages are posturing votes intended to leverage the retirement question. The House wen't all in. The Senate might come up a bit if the retirement percentage can be lowered. Shell game. Look for strong interest to kick money down the road from both.

Response by PO2 Gerry Tandberg made Sep 2 at 2015 10:07 AM

2015-09-02T10:07:21-04:00

I looked up the proposed monthly pay for an E5 over fours years in 2016 (@ 1.3%) and see that it will be $2614.29/month. Thats $15.20/HR based on an eight hour day. I don't know about ya'all, but I worked more then an 8 HR/DAY when I was active. $15.00/HR is basically where the government wants to set the minimum wage. So, I looked up what an E5 might draw after 20 years and see that is $3166.34/MO. Wow folks, you mean I'm looking forward to making $18.41/HR after 20? That's not much incentive to staying in the military. But, who's going to remain an E5 for 20 years? So, I looked up what an E7 will draw after serving 20 years in 2016 and see that its $4472.86/month, or $26.00/HR, which translates to $53,673.12/YR. I'm not sure that sounds like our president and congress respect our military as much as they say. An E5 over 4 equates to a civilian entry level job. Of course I've not considered all the perks we get in service like; "free food" and "free lodging", which is a little hard to put a price tag on. I'd sure like to be able to govern the salaries of our president and congress as much as they govern the salaries of the military.

Response by SFC George Smith made Nov 27 at 2016 9:59 PM

2016-11-27T21:59:36-05:00

its about time...