I think our members of Congress earn way too much and our soldiers way too little. It doesn't matter who the majority in Congress is they always pad their own wallets, everyone else be damned.
2007-07-27 07:03:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brian 7
·
7⤊
1⤋
Didn't our troops just get a pay raise?
I mean there was this article that claimed the Bush admin cut the pay raise to a lower percent, that people where using to bash the Bush admin, while people like you were asking, "how is a cut in a pay raise the same as no pay raise?"
You know, if you do some research, you might not look like all you are trying to do is spread lies.
2007-07-27 14:09:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by avail_skillz 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
This isn't new. This happens at every level. San Diego City council got a pay raise but couldn't find the money to give their police officers a real raise in like 4 years. California legislators will get a raise but can't get a budget together to pay for fire protection and the state is in a drought (If you live here, you know THAT is going to end badly) Now congress gets a raise but our troops in harm's way have families that are in food stamps. It never ends.
2007-07-27 14:08:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by Deep Thought 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
First of all, the raise will happen, and for once the Dems are actually asking for more of a raise than the President.
Secondly, the military is not that underpayed. It only looks that way because so much of the money is either untaxed or their living spaces are a benefit they don't have to pay for.
Finally, rather than address pay, let's address why the government won't allow the military into the retirement benefits that other federal employees are allowed.
2007-07-27 14:17:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Scott L 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
The Democrats always have done this...they might give the Soldiers a minimum 3%, but what other pork did they add to it? Clinton was the worst at doing this...he Vetoed several bills to give the Military raises and benefits...the Dems and Libs will say, "Hye Bush vetoed it..." but they don't mention the 50 million that was added in for a bridge to nowhere or to build a road in some Senators home district...
I can tell you Bush since he came into office was good at giving the Military raises...in 02, E-5 and above got four different pay raises that year...
2007-07-27 14:15:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You left out that the Democrats voted for the troops pay raise and the Republicans blocked it at the request at the Bush who said he would veto it anyway.
Also, a day later Senate Republicans, at the White House's urging, blocked amendments to the bill that would have shortened Iraq tours for U.S. ground forces and slowed frequency of wartime deployments.
And the GOP is for "supporting the troops?"
2007-07-27 14:07:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mitchell . 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
July 27, 2007
"Bush 'strongly opposes' troop pay, benefit initiatives
Talk about lousy timing. With President Bush's popularity scraping bottom in opinion polls, with U.S. casualties rising in Iraq in a force surge that has stretched soldiers' tours to 15 months, the Bush administration said last week it "strongly opposes" key military pay and benefit gains tossed into their fiscal 2008 defense bill.
Initiatives the administration "strongly opposes" include:
A military pay raise for next January of 3.5 percent, vs. a 3 percent raise endorsed by the White House.
Lowering the age-60 start of reserve retirement annuities for reserve component members by the length of their future mobilizations.
Expanding eligibility for Combat-Related Special Compensation to service members forced by combat disabilities to retire short of 20 years.
Directing pharmaceutical manufacturers to provide the Department of Defense with same price discounts for TRICARE retail pharmacy network that are provided already on medicines dispensed from base pharmacies.
The administration also grumbled that the Senate intends to block for another year TRICARE fee increases for under-65 retirees and dependents.
The objections appear in a "Statement of Administration Policy" from the White House's Office of Management and Budget delivered to Senate leaders as they opened floor debate on the defense authorization bill"
2007-07-27 14:07:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think that Congress gets a pay raise but wont give our troops a pay raise. So what else is new?
2007-07-27 14:09:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I think a fairer representation of Veterans issues can be found here:
http://vetsforjustice.com/
PLEASE take a few moments to look at issues of concern for OUR veterans. There's a link from that page where you can sign a petition to help get them the benefits they deserve.
There's also a petition available on the democrats.com page. Yes, it's a democrat site, but this is not a partisan issue. These are OUR vets!
-- "Thank our Soldiers - Restore Veterans' Benefits Cuts" (under recent petitions)
http://www.democrats.com/organize
2007-07-27 17:44:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by sagacious_ness 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
get the facts straight.
just last week the House sent a bill to the Senate that would give military personnel a 3% pay increase
but guess what?
dubbya has said he will veto it if it passes...hows that for supporting our troops?
2007-07-27 14:07:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by Free Radical 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think congress getting a raise is the other half of an oxymoron of public servant. Troops deserve more any way, they don't talk about freedom the give it.
2007-07-27 14:05:33
·
answer #11
·
answered by RANDALL S 2
·
2⤊
1⤋