Max Rose slams 'heartless' WH decision to end National Guard deployments one day before they can...

But why is this surprising?

If you read the article, their orders were originally due to end on 31 May. The administration then extended them to 24 June. Assuming June 24th is their 89th day of orders, they will have accrued leave of about 7 days that will be added to the end of orders at the demob station, which will get them to 1 July. What's the issue? In reality, the administration gave them the benefit with the extension. This congressman is incorrect in his accusations. Another problem they may have is stateside orders (State or Federal) are coded different and did not use to count toward Reduced Retirement Age Act while I served. (I retired 3 years ago, things change). Only orders in support of OIF/OEF counted for early retirement. If they are on Title 32 orders (State) vice Title 10 orders (Federal) the Reduced Retirement Act will not apply at all. They may not even have that a benefit to lose. The Post 9-11 GI Bill requires Service of at least 90 days on active duty (either all at once or with breaks in service) on or after September 11, 2001, boot camp and AIT made them eligible for that, it is a moot point. If this Congressman really wants to help his Guard constituents, maybe he ought to draft legislation to backdate the Reduced Retirement Age to 11 September 2001 instead of the current date of 28 January 2008. There were a lot of Guard deployments prior to that date where no reduced retirement was granted. As an example my entire first 522 day deployment (Oct 03-Apr 04) earned me O days of early retirement.

The green weenie rides again.