Military Learning Center » Rep. Ike Skelton

Concurrent receipt may not be properly funded

Angel — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:20:06 +0000

Just days after the Obama administration announced plans to provide full concurrent receipt of disability and military retired pay to eligible veterans by Jan. 1, 2015, a key House committee chairman threw a bucket of cold water on the initiative.Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a supporter of allowing disabled retirees to concurrently receive full military and veterans benefits, said the Obama initiative included in the 2011 defense budget request does not satisfy the House’s strict budgeting rules.Skelton said the problem is that the administration has not identified specific offsets — either cuts in existing programs or revenue increases — to pay for the new benefits for disabled retirees.“This committee has a deep commitment to this issue and our veterans, but we simply cannot enact it unless the administration identifies and advocates for specific offsets,” Skelton said Wednesday at a committee hearing on the 2011 defense request.The budget request sent to Congress on Monday adds $408 million to the military retirement trust fund in 2011 specifically to cover the first phase of a five-year plan to expand concurrent receipt. The money would go to pay full retired pay to people medically retired from the military with fewer than 20 years of service who have disability ratings of 90 percent or greater. The Obama plan calls for full concurrent receipt to be phased in by Jan. 1, 2015, for all disabled retirees who are eligible for both military retired pay and veterans disability compensation.But Skelton said the $408 million increase in the trust fund doesn’t meet congressional “pay-as-you-go” rules, which require a specific offset to pay for a specific increase. Without an offset, Skelton said the committee is unable to pass concurrent receipt legislation.This is not a new problem. The same thing happened last year when the Obama administration proposed a similar expansion of concurrent receipt without including any funding. Skelton said his committee ended up “holding the bag” for an unfunded initiative.Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., a longtime sponsor of concurrent receipt legislation who also sits on the armed services committee, said he is not ready to give up. Marshall said he hopes the armed services committee would “work closely” with the House Ways and Means Committee, which is responsible for tax policy, to find money for concurrent receipt.“It seems to me we ought to be able to find $5.1 billion over a 10-year period of time, as large as our mandatory spending is. We ought to be able to do that and get this done once and for all,” Marshall said.

Concurrent receipt may not be properly funded

Angel — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:20:04 +0000

Odierno: Don’t lose sight of Iraq

Angel — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:45:03 +0000

WASHINGTON — The top American commander in Iraq on Wednesday warned Congress against losing sight of that nation as a key Mideast ally, even as safer conditions have let him send home more U.S. troops faster than expected.Army Gen. Ray Odierno did not directly address the impact that the war in Afghanistan is having on his mission as he makes sure Iraq’s military and political systems are stable enough to stand alone by the time U.S. forces leave at the end of 2011.But Afghanistan was on the minds of lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee who wanted to know whether U.S. troops and equipment were being shifted there.“As you know, our military has been greatly stressed over the past several years,” said the committee’s chairman, Rep. Ike Skelton, a Democrat. “And they’re potentially facing increased demand for troops in Afghanistan.”The United States invaded Iraq in 2003 — about 18 months after forces were sent to Afghanistan to root out al-Qaida. Iraq was the Pentagon’s focal point for most of the Bush administration, leaving the public view of Afghanistan largely in the dark.But President Barack Obama has put the focus back on Afghanistan, risking making Iraq the forgotten war.Odierno sought to not let that happen, reminding lawmakers that Iraq, with its fledgling democracy, could be a key U.S. partner in the Mideast given its location and natural resources, like oil.“It’s important for us to stay engaged,” Odierno told the House panel. “We have spent a lot of money. We have spent a lot of personal sacrifices inside Iraq. And security is headed in the right direction. We don’t want to lose sight of that.”At the hearing, Odierno announced that he will send home about 4,000 additional troops by the end of October, mostly the result of better security in the once insurgent-riddled Anbar province west of Baghdad. He said that is “a bit faster than we originally planned.”He said there are about 124,000 U.S. troops currently in Iraq, and he expects to meet Obama’s deadline of sending home all but 50,000 by September 2010 as the military ends its combat mission there.Additionally, Odierno estimated about 150,000 pieces of U.S. equipment have been shipped out of Iraq, freeing it up to be sent to Afghanistan. He said the U.S. has closed about 200 bases in Iraq so far.But Iraq’s anticipated Jan. 16 elections will serve as a gut check for security there. Odierno said it will be the first elections run solely by Iraqis, and that any violence surrounding it probably will happen within the first 60 days after the vote.He also called the long-standing tensions between Arabs and Kurds in Iraq’s oil-rich but volatile northern region the largest security threat to the fragile country.Try as he might to remain focused on Iraq, Odierno had a hard time resisting being drawn into the debate that has consumed Washington over whether Obama should order more troops to Afghanistan.“What lessons learned would you like to see brought over to Afghanistan from Iraq?” asked Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Republican.Odierno said he has been too consumed with Iraq and “I don’t pretend to understand the environment in Afghanistan.”Asked about whether he believes Iraq was helped by the 2007 surge of U.S. troops — as military chiefs and hawks in Congress are pushing Obama to do in Afghanistan — Odierno relented.“The surge of forces clearly had an impact on our ability to improve the security inside of Iraq,” Odierno said.He added that civilian missions and a clear strategy also played a huge part in making the surge a success.