Candidate condemns cut in soldiers pay

DES MOINES, IA--Dean attacked President Bush's misplaced priorities today and the continued disconnect between the Bush Administration's rhetoric and reality.

"I am becoming more and more concerned by the poor choices this Administration is making. As the President meets today with Marines at Miramar Air Station in San Diego, I encourage him to explain why his Administration will discontinue current levels of funding for imminent danger pay and family separation allowances to soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Let‚s be clear. Virtually every priority faced by our nation is placed behind this President‚s obsession with tax cuts for those who need them least. As a result, we are now facing a ludicrous situation in which Vice President Cheney will reap a $116,000 per year tax windfall, and yet our soldiers--on extended deployments and tragically dying every day--are facing pay cuts of $225 a month. This Administration's priorities are simply out of sync with the American people's."

www.blogforamerica.com

Let's see if anyone follows his lead.

addressing this a little while ago

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=67017

Bravo for Dean and Kerry and any of the others that spoke on this issue!!!

Only Congress can grant this, the Pentagon can NOT. Pay of our troops are set by CONGRESS not the Pentagon, thus come September 30 unless Congress again passes this pay level, the level MUST drop to the level set by Statute.

Note Congress only pass a TEMPORARY increase to the present level of Hazadous Duty pay. It was passed as part of the Budget NOT the underlying law setting pay rates. Since it is part of the Budget it automatically expires when the Budget end (September 30) unless Congress passes it again as part of the New Budget.

Now Congress can make the increase permanet but that has to be passed independent of the Budget and no one is proposing that, in fact I see NO proposals in Congress to pass it either as part of the Budget OR as a change in the underlying statute. Thus Pentagon is lying, it is saying it will doing everything it can but by law it can do NOTHING unless Congress passes the increase (Now the Pentagon can ask Congress for the increase but the Pentagon has not done that either. Generally when the Pentagon wants something like this it just adds it to its Budget request. The Pentagon has NOT done that nor has the Pentagon ask Congress to Supplemnet its Budget request by this item. Thus the Pentagon does not want it for the Pentagon has NOT asked for it from Congress.

Although Congress might set the amounts, surely the military is able to decide which situations merit the payment of danger-related compensation pay? In which case, they could just claim that Iraq is not dangerous and therefore not pay it.

P.

Remember the Hazardous pay RATE is the issue NOT the area where someone gets that rate. While the Pentagon can set the area where the rate may be earned in, Congress sets the amount to be paid. The problem is NOT the area but the Amount to be paid each soldier. On September 30 the AMOUNT goes back to the old level.

I remember Pat Schroder during Desert Storm, she was the one to propose that our troops get Combat Pay. Bush I refused to say they were in Combat and since Bush I did not say they were in Combat the Soldiers did not get Combat pay till Schroder proposed Combat Pay in Congress and Congress said all the troops involved in Desert Storm should have Combat Pay.

Thus this refusal to pay the troops is consistent, Bush I did not want to pay them for Combat and now Bush II does not want to pay them the higher rate authorized by Congress. Consistent, but how is that supporting the troops.

Deleted - Dupilcate

candidates condemns this cut.

Very effective. He said he had just heard about this, and the (mis)administration should be ASHAMED for even THINKING about doing this, and should apologize to the military families for the angst caused them from having to consider this shameful proposition.

I fully expect Holy Joe to come out and say "I support our President and these pay cuts because our priorities demand that we do so. This war is just. This high pay is not. Opposing these pay cuts is an example of the type of extremist views that will drive our party back to the wilderness..."

.

He's chipping away every day at the Bush facade.

Keep it up, Howard!

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/releases/pr_2003_0814.html

“We have 148,00 troops in Iraq in 127 degree heat who are in danger of losing their lives everyday and the Pentagon is talking about cutting their pay."

“If this Administration is even floating this idea, President Bush ought to make it right by the end of the day.”

Where are the rest of the Dems? Candidate and non-candidate. Sure, Congress isn't in session, but unless they dropped off the planet, they ought to be speaking out!

I should have known Kerry would have something to say on this subject. Love 'em both.

Not the part about the military get their hazard pay cut, but Dean talking about it and asking the right questions.

...why Dean has such a large and loyal following.

Give 'em hell, Howard!

"said it first."

Kucinich said this IN THE HOUSE AND many times since.
Or maybe you just only watch C-Span when your favorite candidate is on. HOW ABOUT SOME FAIRNESS HERE?

how's that?

I said it first :)

http://www.takebackthemedia.com/onearmy.html