Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by CRM114, Aug 14, 2013.
About time, good for the Pentagon.
Would love to see the estimated cost breakdown of this, and where funding comes from.
How about the heterosexual couples who don't get the extra 10 days of leave to get married.
I had the exact same thoughts as LITS and KP.
Going on KP's prost:
Are they going to be charged for the leave, or will this be permissive TDY?
As a parent of an ADAF O1 stationed in TX;getting married next May (heterosexual) in NC, he will be charged his 4 days leave because he will be Out of State. Yes, he is getting married on Sat. and returning to base on Monday.
Just curious why 10 days guaranteed? They can take leave, just like my DS getting married in another state.
I support homosexual unions....yes, even as a Catholic. I am just saying, what you do on leave is your leave. Why should there be an exception to the rule. You are on leave, you don't need to tell them what you will be doing during the leave....just where to locate you during the time.
The answer is easy LITS where they will find the money. Can you spell FURLOUGH? Hagel has already stated furloughs are possible for FY14.
Can you say no pay raises?
The money is always there. as I stated earlier, I support homosexual unions, and think this is a positive step.
I am also curious about funding.
~~~~ It will mean everyone and anyone that wants to be married will get all benefits, including medical and housing. It does simplify things for the Personnel Center, but it also increases the costs that were not placed into the FY14 budget.
~~~~ As I stated Hagel has already stated the DoD budget is another 10% short for FY14.
I don't want it not to occur. I am just curious how they will be able to achieve the costs. My guess will be furloughs for GS's.
This senior official must be a political appointee
Who decides on length as "up to 10 days."
I think same-sex marriage illegal in PA, if so can the soldier be directed to get married in MD? What if the soldier wants to get married in Hawaii? Would there be partial allowance?
What it the commander refuses to grant 10 days?
Oh boy, here we go.
1) Why does the cost breakdown matter? It places gay unions on par with straight unions, as it should be. Taken as a whole, the potential "increase" in costs associated with this choice is probably within the noise realm of changes each year in dependent benefits. The 2010 estimate of LGB in the military was ~2.7%. Given current statistics on the total force regarding marriage and dependents, you can expect maybe a third of those having a non-military dependent spouse that would actually impact the DFAS system. Therefore, there might be an increase of 1% a year in personnel costs? And even I think that guesstimate is pretty high. I think the number is low enough to be in the year-to-year noise.
2) Why 10 days to gay couples and not straight? First, that ONLY applies for those who do not live within 100 miles of a state jurisdiction where same-sex marriage is legal. People in places like california or new england do not qualify. Even people in a place like Nellis in Nevada do not qualify. The THEORY behind offering the 10 day leave policy is that a gay couple has NO CHOICE to marry in their home jurisdiction unlike their straight counterparts. Using an officer couple to make the distinction is unfair as the attempt to make the burden equal is not really meant for those making as much money as an officer. The idea is to help the young enlisted for whom travel outside their home station state might be too expensive to do in a short period of time to attain a marriage that their peers can attain locally.
Again, the distinction that MUST be made is that the OPPORTUNITY to be married in a local jurisdiction is the reason for the 10-day policy and those that face EQUAL opportunity (regardless of preference on where they wish to be married) are not offered a means to offset the additional burden.
Even those of us in the know aren't clear on whether it is permissive TDY, ADDITIONAL leave on top of accrued leave, or if it is the requirement for the SM to be authorized to take up to 10 days of their accrued leave in order to travel to a jurisdiction that allows them to be married.
3) Among LGB members, there is quite a bit of disagreement on this policy. We don't want to appear to have additional bennies (even if it really isn't, but the perception lingers) but would like the same opportunities to be married without additional burden. For officers, it's a moot issue usually as most can afford to travel to wherever and be married. The concern is for younger enlisted who may not have the money to fly to a place and get married. Think about it, the travel cost to an available airport + 2 plane tickets + marriage license fees + lodging at marriage location alone is likely over $1000 dollars. Even just driving the distance takes a lot of time and money. Their peers have the option of just going to the local courthouse.
The old compromise to have a domestic partnership option was removed. So they came up with the 10-day policy which still seems to just set off everyone. How dare they get more leave to get married! It's SOOOO unfair. Honestly, where was the outrage when the option to get married wasn't even allowed. It's hard to be sympathetic.
But I digress. An emerging idea that would remove the whole extra benny outrage could be possible. Extend the jurisdiction of D.C. (where same-sex marriage is legal) to all federal installations for the purpose of marriage. It will bypass state laws that vary and provide the equal opportunity. At that point, no more special rules or policies are needed and you have real equal treatment for all.
I can certainly understand the concern over the 10 days travel that is being offered.
As far as funding for benefits, I'm not sure I see any issue. Every member of the military is allowed to get married, it really doesn't matter if they are Gay or Straight. Say the Army has 490K soldiers, they are all straight, they all decide to get married. Nothing would be said about where the money is coming from. If you have the same number, 490K and 10K are Gay, the fact that the Gay soldiers decide to get married is no different then if they were straight.
I remember the old days when you needed permission to get married and the CO would do some serious counseling. If you want to see where the bulk of the money for benefits go, just look at one of the forums that deals with enlistment for young enlisted soldiers. Every other post seems to ask the question "How soon can I get married", "I am a 20 yo, married and have a child, I want to enlist so my family will have benefits".
Gay soldiers/sailors/Marines/Airmen/and Coast Guardsmen getting married is not what will drive the cost of benefits, there are so many other factors to look at.
I do agree that the 10 days travel needs a bit more of an explaination. Will this 10 days be charged as leave, it should be in my opinion. Will they get any travel expenses, they shouldn't, again my opinion. Again I would have to read more information, I could easily change my position on this one.
They'll get the 10 days too if they live in states where heterosexual marriage is illegal. It's only fair, right?
Have you considered going into public policy HG?
haha. Once I finish my PhD in public policy in October, I plan to buy some land in Wyoming where I can run and hide if ever someone offers me a job in public policy.
Dude; we can be neighbors!!!
On another "Not so Serious" response.
If we can go "On-Line" to shop. If we can go "On-Line" register for selective service. Hell, if we can go "On-Line" to get a BS, MA, or PhD degre.................... Why the hell can't people go online and get married. It's a basic simple contract.
1. The two people fill out the form.
2. They have a Notary Public witness the 2 individuals "Signing" the form, (A notary is NOT required to read, know, approve, etc... what the document says. Simply witnesses that certain individuals are signing it)
3. Send the form in, along with a blood test or whatever is required. (Again; a doctor/clinic does not NEED to know why you want a blood test or whatever medical test is being done. They just need to perform the test)
4. Receive your marriage license, which is registered in the issuing state.
The ONLY time this could be an issue, is if someone wants a "Traditional Church Type" wedding. In all seriousness, a state like Hawaii or wherever, could generate a LOT of money doing this via the internet. Basically, you have a website with all the information/forms you need to know. The couple do all the work. They send back a completed, signed, and notarized form with all the other tests or whatever; along with a receipt number from when they initially went online and paid $100 to receive access to all this information and forms. The state basically makes $100, via credit card, for spending 10 minutes filing a form and mailing out a pre-printed license. Hell, with the amount of money it costs for travel to these states; along with hotels and such; the state could probably get away with charging up to $500 per license.
Christcorp and Hornetguy, you guys make too much sense to be neighbors and HLS wouldn't allow it.
Just to be clear, I'm not commenting on homosexual couples and if they should have benefits.... just asking where the money comes from and why that money was stashed away while people are losing work days.
Personnel costs are HUGE... this is just an additional cost. Just would love to know where they found the $$
This makes way too much sense to actually become policy.
Why would you think/believe THEY "found" any more money? Instead of decreasing the DoD budget for FY14 Congress will probably increase it to cover these new costs.
Only because the people who have the ability to do anything like that seem unable to do anything.
The simple account is other accounts. I am sure other folks to chime in but the rules on how DoD spend money is crazy.
My household, money goes into my checking account - I use it
For DoD, money goes into many different accounts and there are very complex rules on transferring funds between accounts and some transfer requires Congressional approval.
Say Army was planning to conduct an exercise that will cost $10 million in non personnel cost. They cancel it, so they have $10 million surplus. Typically, that $10 million can be used for another exercise, but cannot be simply transferred to civilian payroll account. Of course politics comes as even if Army could transfer the funding, they might be not want to as the Congress might cut $10 million for the exercise account next year because Army diverted it this year.
Yeah, they kinda need to know why blood is being drawn. If blood is drawn, a provider will indicate what test is needed. Plus, if there isn't a good reason to perform a medical procedure, insurance companies will scream fraud.
Historically, any major policy change that results in an increase in spending due to a minority group has always been met with grumblings...
I could literally replace the complaint about the increase spending with another minority group (women, blacks, etc) and the conversation wouldn't be THAT different.
Allowing (women, blacks) to serve = increased spending...
Allowing (women, blacks) to commission = increased spending...
The "10 day" rule makes sense to travel to and from a state to practice a religious and legal ceremony. However I do agree with many of the posters, the "10 day" rule should be for everyone who wants to marry. By providing homosexuals with this benefit, the Army is further demonstrating "we view homosexuals differently from heterosexuals."
Not sure how.... it would affect hiring, but not current members (unless it came with a requirement to increase overall numbers and hiring/firing).
Of course DOD also does get great marks by the GAO on their ability to manage their money.
My son was just married and traveled, let's call it 1000 miles, to marry. He traveled July 4th, married July 6th, and returned with his bride to his base July 7th. NO LEAVE TAKEN. What's with the ten days?
and that's just for starters here.
Separate names with a comma.