Wandering Wahls

Go read MOAA President VADM Norb Ryan’s message to Congress to oppose taxing military people first and to stop “ignoring billions in savings opportunities” that result from inefficiencies and redundancies (does three medical services versus one come to mind perhaps)!

He is spot on.

Also, use MOAA’s online tool to send your legislators a message and let them know what you are thinking.

One of the things to be thankful for is the service and sacrifice of so many for our country. Help spread the word to Congress that these members and their sacrifices need to be recognized instead of blamed and burdened with cuts in benefits.

What a great date for Veterans Day to fall on: 11-11-11. Time to play the lottery.

Anyway, happy Veterans Day to all veterans out there and thank you for your service. In our house, Mary Claire took off to meet up in Las Vegas with group of nurses who all served together at Lakenheath in the late eighties. No husbands or boyfriends, just 5 Air Force nurses in Las Vegas for Veteran’s Day weekend. Nothing to worry about there…is there? Hmmm.

I’ll have to think more about that later, and why she was so inquisitive as to how much we had in our checking account.

In case you missed it, MOAA has an excellent article by Col. Steve Strobridge titled “As I See It – The Bogus Case for Military Vesting.”

Well, I can tell you this – Col. Strobridge must have 20-10 vision, because he sees the issue well. The comment that stands out to me is this:

“There’s no comparison between military and civilian careers, and the last thing the military needs is a retirement system based on civilian norms.”

I can’t agree with this more. I worked in the corporate world before marrying into the military life – from Seattle to Phoenix to NYC to D.C. From personal experience, civilian and military jobs are two completely different careers. For example, I could switch employers and negotiate a nice raise at any point in my tenure. A soldier can’t approach the Navy and offer his or her services to the Navy if they give him a 10% raise and a bonus.

It is silly that our politicians and the Defense Policy Board want to make the military retirement system civilianized when no two other aspects are at all similar – if military members worked in the same context as civilians, then perhaps one could make the argument.

The other good point Col. Strobridge makes is about the concern that 83% of military members don’t obtain retirement benefits because they don’t stay for a career. Well, first, that is their choice. And, many join for one or two tours to get training and then go on to better paying civilian jobs. The Col’s additional point though is that with a civilianized plan, we’re not going to see that figure decrease – more people will get out because the carrot of 20 years and a retirement benefit will be gone.

Maybe on Veterans Day an epiphany will occur to our politicians and they’ll realize that the retirement benefit needs to stay and that there are other numerous ways to save money. I don’t put much hope on this though since most of their epiphanies are the green ones presented by lobbyists.

Anyway: Happy Veterans Day to all of you vets out there! And help MOAA help you by joining MOAA as well as writing your elected representatives about the issues important to veterans. Now, I have to find our checkbook – it’s gone missing somehow.

This week, it seems I’m reading or listening to MOAA discuss military retirement almost everywhere. There’s The New York Times (via MSNBC); Fox News with Lou Dobbs; USA Today; and The Washington Post.

This dialogue is great for the issue and raising support for our troops and their benefits. (MOAA is calling people to battle stations as well!)

Interestingly enough, I’ve seen the controversy being discussed by everyday military members, too. Active duty members in my business writing class have spoken up with their disagreements over the proposed changes. Outside of the classroom, and near the bbq and beer, active duty and retired military friends have brought up the topic. Across the board, concerns are from a personal and family perspective (active duty members have based family decisions on the current promised system).

However, there is also a strong concern for the military being the best it can be. This sentiment is brought on by the worry that the proposed changes will make it hard to retain the best and the brightest among officers and enlisted. Vesting members after 10 years will take away the carrot keeping members in for 20 years because there will be no penalty for switching to a better paying employer.

I don’t know anyone with over 20 years of service who can say for sure that they would have stayed for the long run if they had been vested at 10 years. I think the D.C. policy wonks are missing the fact that there is a great demand for military members with 10-20 years of service based on their training and skills. And most of these positions offer a much greater salary and better working standards than the military.

The son-in-law of a good friend (he’s a veteran with tours in Iraq, his wife is a retired Air Force nurse by the way) wrote a really good piece for The New York Times on this issue – it’s worth reading.

Finally, to military members out there – what are your thoughts? Have you utilized MOAA to email your Senators or Representative?

Perhaps the policy wonks at the Defense Business Board will listen to MOAA and people experience living the military life. MOAA’s recent efforts to talk about the proposed changes to the military retirement system has sparked a lot of inquiries from members concerning the impact the changes will make to their retirement. In response, MOAA has set up a Q&A page to answer some common questions.

The scary part here is that it is not a sure thing that current retirees won’t have their current retirement payments cut. Honestly though, I can’t believe that Congress would reduce the retirement pay of current retirees. Even for Congress it would be a lot to ask, for example, a 65 year-old military retiree to accept reduced retirement pay and to go find a job to make up for the reduced income – let alone changing promises to people who made sacrifices over a 20+ year career in anticipation of a promised retirement benefit.

A lot of retired military are raising kids and supporting a mortgage based on the government living up to their end of the retirement bargain made in return for 20+years of service. Cuts to this pay would create a bit of personal economic turmoil among most retired military.

I’d like to suggest to MOAA that they ask the Presidential candidates what their thoughts are on the issue of proposed changes to military retirement. It would be interesting to see their responses.

Interestingly enough, after wondering last week if the proposed changes to the military retirement system would impact current active duty members, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta responded – well, not to me exactly, but I did read an article on his concerns and thoughts about the proposed changes.

Secretary Panetta addressed the proposed retirement changes and grandfathering active duty members. He appears to feel strongly that current members should retain the current system and be able to keep what was promised to them:

“People who have come into the service, who have put their lives on the line, who have been deployed to the war zones, who fought for this country, who have been promised certain benefits for that — I’m not going to break faith with what’s been promised to them,” Panetta said.

That’s good news. I would hope he truly believes this because active duty members have made long-term life plans based on a retirement system promised to them.

However, he doesn’t sound solidly behind maintaining the present retirement system when he comments:

“One aspect of the retirement issue is one of fairness, the secretary said. Most service members do not spend 20 years in the military and therefore do not get any retirement benefits when they leave the service.”

Secretary Panetta’s comments follow the Defense Business Board’s statement that 83% of those who serve will receive no retirement benefit.

Assuming the 83% refers to people who separate willingly, these choices were made weighing the pluses and minuses of separating. I would guess that the salary and lifestyle of a civilian job outweighed the retirement benefit of staying. It’s a matter of choice. For the sake of change based on fairness though, I think this change would open the door to good people leaving early or not joining the military at all, impacting both retention and readiness.

But, we can make our voice heard in a nifty and easy way:  MOAA has made it easy to send your concerns to the President, Vice President, Congress, and Secretary Panetta.

I wrote about the potential changes to the military retirement system and what happens – MOAA starts a legislative campaign. I’ll leave it to both my readers to infer the level of influence I have in DC circles. However, this is an important issue that military members need to be on top of. Why?

First, if you’re active duty you stand to possibly lose a few benefits. For one, go to MOAA’s site to see the impact on your future retirement pay if the military raises your eligibility to age 57 or above.

Or, consider another possible impact to active duty members: Is the old system going to be grandfathered in for current members?

Most members have planned on a specific pension for their military retirement (a lot of members use this government site to calculate their retired pay).

Therefore, based on the promised retirement program, members have made long-term life and family plans. Perhaps the member is planning to use this pay as their house payment upon retirement. Or, maybe the member wants to give back to the community and start teaching (knowing the pay is low). With the present retirement system, retirement pay allows members the flexibility to consider a broad range of jobs at a broad range of salary levels; allows members to choose where they want work and live rather than having the job choose these for them (heck, do you work to live or live to work?).

However, the foundation for these plans could disappear if retirement rules are changed and there is no grandfather clause.

Another reason this issue is important is: how will these changes impact the military’s ability to retain and attract people? The MOAA site poses the same question I did previously (there’s that level of influence thing again):

“What choice would you make as a 10-year service member facing a fourth or fifth combat deployment if the military delayed your retired pay eligibility until age 57, 60 or 65?”

I recently talked to a helicopter pilot and a nurse, both at active duty 20 years or more. Both weren’t very sure that they’d still be in the military under the proposed retirement rules – the financial lure of the private sector for their jobs would probably have been too great to pass up.

I’m with MOAA. These proposed rules are shortsighted and, I would add, not realistically thought out (go back and look at my entry on policy wonks). What can you do though? Go to the above MOAA site and: learn how to email Congress; learn how to obtain legislative updates from MOAA; learn how to join MOAA and Voices for America’s Troops.

And, go to MOAA’s Facebook and Twitter pages and express your opinion!

One of the reasons I enjoyed being stationed in Okinawa is that living on the little island made me feel remote from the problems of the States – it was like we had the benefits of being an American but didn’t have the daily intrusion of crime stats, actresses being jailed, famines, plagues, locusts (well, you know what I mean). Living in the states though, I woke up to this blaring headline today:

“Pentagon braces for much deeper military spending cuts as part of debt deal,” and, word that there’s a “a plan that would shrink the Pentagon’s planned budgets by $1 trillion over the next decade.”

Now, I do concede that there are areas than can be cut (combine the medical services, PCS members after 4 or 5 years, charge O-6 and above fees for their preferential parking, etc.).

And I know that a lot of the politician’s talk is just bumper sticker phrasing – goodness knows that politicians wouldn’t want to offer substantive ideas that they might be held accountable for.

But whenever the issue of cutting defense is brought up, I become concerned about the frequency and ease that specific cuts are directed toward active duty members and their families. As Robert Kagan says: “defense has no domestic constituency.” (It is a relief to know that there is a corporate constituency that legislators will listen to and avoid cutting any military related pork that might harm their reelection funds.)

I may know one reason for my concern: these proposed cuts are usually suggested by groups whose names include important sounding terms like Initiative, Foundation, Institute, Business Board, and Committee for something. And these groups seem to be staffed by budget wonks, Congressional 20-something staffers, senior “fellows” (do their business cards actual read “fellow” as their job title?) and other bureaucrats – all nice people I’m sure, with nice degrees who get nice press coverage, but with probably little or no military time PCSing, TDYing, or deploying.

Thus, cuts to retirement plans, housing, schooling, medical, etc. get tossed around pretty easily without a handle on the impact to the people serving (such as described in this article, “Daddy, Why Is My School Falling Down?”) or the impact on retention and recruitment.

One proposed area of change consistently mentioned is the retirement system and making it mirror the plans of non-military careers. This idea always intrigues me. The military is a workplace that is different than the typical job (on call anytime to deploy down range or for humanitarian reasons, ongoing physical fitness requirements, advanced degree requirements, get promoted or get out, move every 2 or 3 years, etc.). Thus, this type of job requires a retirement plan that is different from the standard workplace in that it is more rewarding, as well as attractive enough to get people to sign on to these conditions. Maybe I’m naïve but if the military changes to a standard retirement plan like non-military jobs, it’s going to be tough to attract people as well as retain the good people.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what specifics come about from negotiations between Congress and the President. But, thankfully, there is a voice for military members that will be involved speaking up for and delivering information to the military member and his or her family – an organization I like to call MOAA.

And, it even has staff who are non-military, wonks, Generals, Admirals, etc. who work hard to listen to and understand the concerns of military members and their families – and are all nice people! (I don’t know if we have any “fellows” though).

As you readers know, my family took an 18-month RV trip after my wife retired from the Air Force. But, in case one of you three forgot, here’s a brief rundown: Mary Claire retired out of Landstuhl, Germany and we had no place to call home in the States. So, we bought a 41-foot RV with a tow dolly for the car and off we went. I do have to add that we went off knowing nothing about driving an RV, dumping waste, or how we would survive in such compact quarters (though we’d always made it in base housing so we weren’t too worried).

Anyway, it was a great journey and well worth the effort. One of the best aspects of the trip though is that our writings have convinced other military members to take the same journey – the most recent being Patrick and Melissa Williams. Patrick is retiring from the Navy after a final stint in the Pentagon. He and Melissa had been debating their options when they realized there was another possibility for them and their two daughters beyond letting the job dictate where they would live – they could RV it for a year (or longer).

Mary Claire and I have been emailing and talking on the telephone with Patrick and Melissa and helping guide them into their trip (talk about the blind leading the blind). It has been fun to talk to them and hear their excitement and ideas, all the while doing this from scratch just like we did.

So, for anyone who is nearing retirement and hasn’t figured out where to live, and is not so excited about heading into that 9-5 job (or 6-8) which dictates that you live in a locale you’re unsure of, then consider these benefits, to name a few, that the Williams and the Wahls have talked about that come from a family cross-country RV trip:

• The military will store your household goods for a year, for free!
• You’ve got a military pension coming in.
• You get to know our country and you’ll understand why so many people say that they love living where they do, and you’ve always wondered why in the world would people live (no jokes about Detroit here, okay – I lived there for awhile).
• You’ll become enthusiasts for our National Parks system – these parks are amazing and you can visit them offseason and have the Rangers all to yourselves for their hikes, fireside talks, etc.
• Your family will grow closer and your kids will gain more knowledge than possible in a classroom: you can visit all of those historic spots you keep talking about seeing, from Gettysburg to the Liberty Bell to Disney World (ok, not so historic, but great fun). And, all of you will gain an appreciation for the diversity of cultures among Americans.
• Finally, you’ll end up with a load of stories for your grandchildren from all of the misadventures (“What’s black waste doing in the shower?!”).

Don’t think you’d be alone either. There’s a big crowd of families out there full-timing it in an RV. Go to Familiesontheroad.com to read about their adventures – and these people are non-military and doing their journey without free household goods storage or a monthly military pension.

And, if you need any encouragement, get ahold of us and we’ll set you straight.

Turning 50 really smacked me in the head the other day (and the ear, arm, and leg). I was sitting in the USAFA Clinic waiting to see my provider and two things struck me.

First, I’ve now seen providers more often since I turned 50 than in all the time prior to turning 50. Talk about going downhill – and it’s only been a couple of months.

Second, our very good friends, the Grabowskis, visited. We have known them since Mary Claire and I were at Nellis AFB in 1984. After about an hour of talk, we realized we were doing something we promised never to do – talking about our ailments. We’ve gone from laughs over beers at the Check 6 O’Club to comparing hearing loss over an iced tea.

On to the title of this column though: At the clinic, I had to see the audiologist about ringing in my ears (I said, I SAW THE AUDIOLOGIST…). She put me in a soundproof DJ’s booth and played the latest Top 40 buzzing noises. Unfortunately, I only heard 20 of them. I found out that my hearing has decreased for high ranges such as kids and women’s voices (my wife got a laugh out of that – and wanted to see the doctor’s report).

I also saw a PA, pharmacist, MRI appointment desk, and the orthotics folks about an armband for tennis elbow (what’s up with this diagnosis – I don’t even play tennis). Now, I’m not listing these to tell everyone my ailments (though after the Grabowski’s visit I’m paranoid about this). Instead it is to point out that I did all of these things in the equivalent of a one square block area. I didn’t have to drive to other offices or repeatedly fill out the same forms. All services are in the same building and all providers have my records on computer.

In contrast, I have been taking my dad to appointments with various doctors. We’re driving here, driving there, filling out the same forms, answering the same questions, and so forth. Oh, the frustration.

In conclusion, and to my point (sorry to take so long), I really appreciate our base clinics and our military medical system. Not only do they have the best providers (especially nurses and nurse-midwives), the system makes medical care easy and efficient. If we could only replicate that in the civilian sector.

The MOAA Spouse Facebook page had a recent entry about DoD helping military spouses get their professional licenses more easily transferred from state to state. This is a great project from my perspective.

Relating it to my situation, when I was active duty, keeping my licensure and certification as an RN and as a Certified Nurse Midwife was pretty easy. As long as I maintained a current license in my home state, along with required continuing education, I was able to practice nursing in the Air Force all over the globe.

However, returning to work after military retirement was an eye-opening experience. It was not a quick and smooth process to get my Colorado RN license, then Advanced Practice Nurse license, in order to get a job here. I already had a current California license, so I thought it would “transfer” over easily. I had to get all official transcripts, pay a fee to have California verify my license and my NCLEX score (the nursing exam that I took in 1985!).

After all that, my application sat on a desk for several months. Although I have been practicing as a Nurse Midwife for 17 years, I am still not able to write prescriptions in Colorado. In order to get prescriptive authority I have to retake some graduate level classes, and have 1,800 hours of supervision writing prescriptions here in Colorado. This will take a while, as I only volunteer at USAFA’s Women’s Health Clinic once a week!

I was glad to read about an upcoming change in law in several states that will make it easier for military spouses to maintain professional licenses as they move from state to state. Many military spouses work in career fields that require licenses (33% of working spouses), such as nursing and teaching. It’s a shame that many gave up their careers or had to let their licenses lapse because the hurdles to get licensed were not worth it.

Kudos to the DoD Office of Military and Family Policy for working with the state governments and getting this done! Maybe DoD could extend that program to retired active duty members.

Read the full article from DoD, Military Spouses Get Help With Professional Licenses.