A Christmas Present from the Department of Defense

A Department of Defense (DOD) panel under pressure to cut costs for military service has just issued a Christmas present to all military retirees. They declared that military health benefits for retired military personnel were too costly.

The report said the relatively low health fees paid by military retirees versus the growing cost of military health benefits are "out of step with overall trends in the U.S. health care system" and "unfair to the U.S. taxpayer."

The report states that what the retiree currently pays for health care will increase by thousands of dollars per year. In many cases the added cost will be in the neighborhood of $3000 per year. Of course it is likely that the cost will be raised annually so that as a retiree approaches their golden years they will be charged even more.

One has to wonder if this Christmas present is how the government thanks our soldiers for 20 or more years of service?

When soldiers enter combat - it is not a business meeting. Long separations from family, deployments throughout the world, 24 hour or longer days on maneuvers or training exercises in desert or extreme cold weather environments are not sales meetings. There are very view picnic lunches.

From the moment one volunteers to serve our nation they give up any semblance of a normal life. For over 20 years and in many cases more, a service member is required to be on call and family duties are overshadowed by military responsibilities. One has to think that some payment for later health care was extracted from each soldier for their service.

What would be unfair to taxpayers is that no one would be willing to defend the United States. Currently the services pay up-front bonuses of six figures to those willing to accept the challenge and they are barely making their quotas. Treatment like this might explain it. I daresay that treatment such as this will only present another obstacle to recruiting for the volunteer military and might force the nation to return to a draft with a very small core of professionals to provide leadership and expertise in the event of war.

As a retired US Army soldier that is disabled as a result of my service, to say I am disappointed is an understatement. But perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps the US taxpayer thinks the bill is too high. Presently, I believe that many mothers and fathers believe the risks of military service for their sons and daughters is too high. I've read many stories from parents that don't want military recruiters near their children.

My father served, I served, my daughter served. We believed we owed our service to our nation. In return we thought our nation would take care of us. Looks like we were probably wrong.

We all paid and continue to pay taxes - perhaps the $7.5 billion in pork that was recently passed by Congress could go to health care treatment for those who faithfully served our nation.

Oh well - I guess my disappointment explained here will be worth little - Merry Christmas to the DOD!

A final thought - retired Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld tried to win on the cheap in Iraq, by sending in fewer soldiers than recommended by many senior officers. The result was an increased loss of life for our soldiers and a failed strategy. Finally General Patraeus came along, the surge was brought about and success is within sight at a much lower cost of the lives of our brave young soldiers. The lesson would seem to be that the cost of success in war is not cheap. Neither is the cost for taking care of those that dedicated their lives to service. But then again, I could be wrong. Sure wish some taxpayers would weigh in - but probably this story will be buried in the news as an item for someone else to worry about.