Panetta: Any retirement changes won't affect serving military

News > Panetta: Any retirement changes won't affect serving military

Photos


Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, right, holds a roundtable discussion with members of the press in his office at the Pentagon on Aug. 19, 2011. Writers representing American Forces Press Service, Stars and Stripes and the Military Times Media Group interviewed Panetta on issues related to security and military forces. (DOD photo/U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jacob N. Bailey)
Download HiRes

Related Links
• Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta

Panetta: Any retirement changes won't affect serving military

Posted 8/19/2011

Email story Print story

by Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

8/19/2011 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- In his clearest statement on the subject to date, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said today that if the military retirement system changes, it will not affect serving service members.

"I will not break faith," the secretary said during a roundtable meeting with military media representatives in the Pentagon.

Panetta's predecessor, Robert M. Gates, asked the Defense Business Board to look at the military retirement system and make recommendations. The final report is due later this month, but Panetta said he is familiar with the outlines of the proposal.

"I certainly haven't made any decisions" on retirement, he said.

"People who have come into the service, who have put their lives on the line, who have been deployed to the war zones, who fought for this country, who have been promised certain benefits for that -- I'm not going to break faith with what's been promised to them," Panetta said.

People in the service today will come under the current retirement system, which gives retirees 50 percent of their base pay after 20 years of service.

"Does that stop you from making changes?" Panetta asked. "No, because obviously you can 'grandfather' people in terms of their benefits and then look at what changes you want to put in place for people who become members of the all-volunteer force in the future."

One aspect of the retirement issue is one of fairness, the secretary said. Most service members do not spend 20 years in the military and therefore do not get any retirement benefits when they leave the service.

"They are not vested in any way," Panetta said. "The question that is at least legitimate to ask is, 'Is there a way for those future volunteers to shape this that might give them better protection to be able to have some retirement and take it with them?'"

Health care is another area that has to be dealt with, the secretary said. In fiscal 2001, the DOD health care bill was $19 billion. It is more than $50 billion now, he said, and it soars to the neighborhood of $60 billion in future years. Among proposals Congress is contemplating is an increase in some TRICARE military health plan premium payments.

"I think those recommendations make sense," Panetta said. "Especially with tight budgets, it does make sense that people contribute a bit more with regards to getting that coverage."

The Defense Department -- which is responsible for a large part of the nation's discretionary budget -- will do its part to reduce the budget deficit, the secretary said. But while Defense has a role to play, he added, Congress has to deal with the more than two-thirds of the federal budget that represents the mandatory spending.

"If you are serious about getting the deficit down," Panetta said, "you have to deal with the mandatory side of the budget and taxes."

DOD has a responsibility to look at all aspects of the budget, the secretary said, and officials at the Pentagon are doing that.

"This is not because it is necessarily going to hurt areas," he added, "because frankly, a lot of this can be done through efficiencies, a lot of it can be done looking at the administrative side of the programs: What can we do to make these programs more efficient?"

The secretary said he believes the budget crunch can represent an opportunity to make DOD a more efficient, effective and agile force that still can deal with the threats of the future.

The department also needs to ask how to provide benefits for troops and their families that will be effective at ensuring the nation always has a strong volunteer force, Panetta said.

"That's a debate and discussion that is important for the Defense Department to have, the White House to have, the Congress to have and the country to have," he said. "(We) need to have that debate about 'How are we going to do this in a way that maintains the best military in the world?'"

The Defense Department will face some tough choices, Panetta acknowledged.

"I think the bottom line is this can be an opportunity to shape something very effective for the future that can still represent the best defense system in the world," he said.

Comments

9/21/2011 8:15:48 AM ET
i came in in the early 80s. i was promised full heath benefits for me and my family for life at any military facility. since then they have cut all military facilities from every where in New England areas where i enlisted. now i am forced to use tri-care and have to pay for a family plan. as far as i am concerned they have already cut our benefits and now want to cut more.

Maj, Guard

9/6/2011 10:15:13 AM ET
Let adjust the retirement of Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta to comform to today's economic environment and for that matter the rest of congress and the senate. Then we will see how they like being toyed with. I really don't see how they can do something like this to soldiers and not look at their own compensation, too. Don't ask people to do what you will not be willing to do yourself.

S. Moulty, CA

8/26/2011 5:48:31 PM ET
Raising health care premiums is effectively the same thing as cutting retirement pay. Free health care for life was the promise I received when I enlisted back in the 80s. While I realize our current health care premiums are a lot less than the alternatives that are out there, IMHO this is also breaking faith.

PreserveMyBenefits, US

8/26/2011 12:10:29 PM ET
A few have commented about the fairness of local andor state government employees double-dipping. Most of the federal civil servents that I know are double-dipping with their military retirements and a federal government job paycheck. I know a lot of retirees who slid right into those jobs as soon as they retired and didn't have a problem doing so. Pointing out how unfair it is only gives the folks that want to stop us from collecting our retirements as soon as we leave service the ammunition change our retirement program. If it isn't right for a fireman policeman or teacher to do that then it isn't right for us military retirees. So which is it SMgt and Fred?

MSgt Ret, Offutt

8/26/2011 9:27:27 AM ET
If you offer retriement compensation in any form before 20 years of service, what you will have is a shortage of people with 8-14 years of service. At the 12 year mark people tend to start getting burned out. Without the 20-year carrot, many will take what is offered at that point and leave. So you will have a few who are past 15-16 years and a ton of folks at 2-6 years. Mid-level NCO's will be VERY thin. Sure would be nice if the leaders would actually LISTEN to the counsel of SNCO's who point things like this out. E5's and E6's are the ones who get the job done.

JG, Ellsworth AFB

8/25/2011 11:19:18 AM ET
Capt soon to be major, The inflation in our promotion system is the exact reason that neither you nor anyone else can assert that the 157 fired majors are clearly in the bottom 10 percent of their peer group. Do you really believe that all members' records are inflated to the same degree? Assuming no is it better that those with more inflated records thus less integrity are promoted first. You're making judgments about people you've never met and assuming they can't possibly provide anything of value to our nation's defense based on 9 lines of text from a PRF and whether or not they earned a DP. Benchmarking DOD HR policies against private for-profit industry is clearly unwise as other respondents to this story have so eloquently stated. However I guess the system MUST work since you were apparently selected for promotion...

Job Hunting, CONUS

8/25/2011 10:40:50 AM ET
Cut the benefits for illigal children born in the U.S. Get so America can take care of its citizens instead of the rest of the world.

Cal it, Eglin AFB

8/25/2011 9:26:43 AM ET
It amazes me that the first thing they think to cut affects 1 percent and is considered the most important to protecting our country. I saw the slides and they state people showed at a high rate that retirement was not a deciding factor in staying in. Really. Ask those after 10 years or 15 years that question. If they do this, a lot of people will be very unhappy and you will see a big part of the force walk, in my opinion, rather quickly

Amazed, Delaware

8/24/2011 3:33:04 PM ET
How typically short-sighted a policy from our politicians. Sure it won't affect those of us who are already retired but it sure WILL affect recruiting and retention. As a reservist I wouldn't mind seeing the AD retirement held off until 60 like ours is in the reserve component but that's not the context under which people currently serve. Try doing away with the contractors that are over-charging the govt at every turn and do away with the use it or lose it policy for the budget. You're just encouraging waste with that piece of stupidity. Take the savings and put them back into the system for retirements and I bet you'd come out just fine.

Mike, MN

8/24/2011 3:30:11 PM ET
ADAF, military pensions aren't bleeding us into bankruptcy. There are plenty of unearned handouts being given to people who refuse to lift a finger to help themselves in this country and tremendous waste in all areas of government. Not to mention our leaders are spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors. No offense to drunken sailors by the way. Military pensions are not freebies. They are earned with great sacrifice. You obviously do not plan to serve a full career or else you wouldn't be so easy to give up what you earned.

DC, MD

8/24/2011 3:04:41 PM ET
Last time I checked, the SecDef wasn't a voting member of Congress....

Coffee Maker, Macdill AFB

8/24/2011 2:35:38 PM ET
Good-bye volunteer force. Hello draft. That's my prediction...

Really, here

8/24/2011 9:30:50 AM ET
SMSgt C got it right. Various city and state employees have no problem double dipping and collecting huge retirements while the military is constantly under the gun for our benefits. A high ranking cop in my hometown is ALREADY RETIRED from another force and makes $70K, 6 figures for his new job.

Fred, Aplace

8/24/2011 1:38:25 AM ET
We did not work a standard 40 hour work week serving in the military. Deployments, family separation,s long demanding and tedious hours of work, conforming to the military image for physical fitness and personal appearance, the rigid discipline and regmentation of the military environment. Our pensions and benefits from a 20 plus career were earned. Some had the quality of their lives altered by military service. If you want the return of a conscripted military and all the problems associated with it then chop away. If you want a military like the one we have today that the american public has more confidence in than many of our politicians and attorneys then leave the current retirement system as it is. It works.

James Hamlin MSgt Retired, Tinker AFB OK

8/23/2011 9:41:31 PM ET
No other job is like ours, no other job has life on the line....wait....hmmm...what about cops and firemen? Is theirs a profession and not a job? Do they not risk life and limb?

Tak, USAF

8/23/2011 8:39:59 PM ET
Just because someone did not deploy to a contingency location warrants taking their 20-year commitment and trashing it? Many promises were made and broken in the past. I am not too sure I trust what comes out of any of their mouths. Too close to quit.

Fair and Consistent SNCO, PACAF

8/23/2011 8:37:47 PM ET
Health care is another area that has to be dealt with, the secretary said. In fiscal 2001 the DOD health care bill was $19 billion. It is more than $50 billion now. These figures should not have been used. This was the same time period for the current wars and of course healthcare will go up when you have troops coming back with disabilities that force them out of service. Once the wars end and all combat troops are back home then these numbers should start going back down.

Tito, Sanityville

8/23/2011 5:12:02 PM ET
I find it interesting that they bring up the amount of personnel who actually retire in the military. Yes hte option is there, but it is just that. Most people can't handle the stress and just get out. For those who make that choice to stay in for a career you earn the right to a fair retirement. During your 20years of service you put up with so much versus others in the US. We are rightfully entitled to our retirement. I can honestly see the budget being cut here before anywhere else. Too many think that service members receive more benefits than they should eventhough they volunteer to put their lives on the line.

Mary, VA

8/23/2011 3:01:58 PM ET
On a good note, this will make a lot of ex-spouses mad due to the fact they can't start collecting their half until we start collecting ours....js

KB, TX

8/23/2011 2:45:57 PM ET
Before we all go off on a FaceBook or email rage, how about we look in the mirror. In 2010 voter turnout was 40 percent, voter turnout for Active Duty military was 11 percent. Membership in professional organizations, those that lobby on our behalf for improved or continued benefits, is less than 25 percent of the total force. What message do we send to our elected representatives when we fail to perform our basic rights and privileges as Americans. The rights we've taken an oath to support and defend. It is easy to look at cuts in areas where it appears those affected don't care. Get off your seat, register, vote, join a professional organization, write your elected representatives. If the doom and gloom many a predicting comes true we only have ourselves to blame.

CMSgt Kevin Ott, Ellsworth AFB SD

8/23/2011 11:26:21 AM ET
It is great to hear that Secretary Panetta has made such a definitive statement regarding retirement. This is a huge relief to me and other servicemembers. Thank you Secretary Panetta. Here's something to consider in order to save some DoD money: make considerable cuts to service music bands. A few of the old school marching bands are fine for tradition's sake but bands like Tops in Blue absolutely do NOT justify the expense and do little to nothing for service morale. In fact those bands' very existence is detrimental to my morale considering its purely recreational nature and irrelevance to true military service. Cut those and other superfluous services before touching retirement.

Martin Fogle, Ft. Meade

8/23/2011 10:56:36 AM ET
I got out after 8 years. I knew what I was giving up by not staying 20 years. My husband retired after 23 years. I have TRICare Standard benefits, which are difficult to use because no-one takes it. I can't sign up for a High Deductible Health Care Plan because I have TRICare and so I pay more for health insurance that my doctors will take. So either exclude TRICare from the excluded health plans for HDHP or make TRICare into an HDHP and keep the premium the same or lower. This would allow people to invest in a Health Savings Account -HSA- which has more tax benefits than a Flexible Spending Account-FSA.

Susan, Tinker AFB OK

8/23/2011 10:19:52 AM ET
Yea right... don't put your TSP money behind his statement, he lacks full authority and will be forced to concede. Oh and think about what he has said. People who have come into the service who have put their lives on the line who have been deployed to the war zones who fought for this country who have been promised certain benefits for that -- I'm not going to break faith with what's been promised to them --- Yea but increasing the cost of healthcare and the GI bill are OK to break promises on. Those were what we signed up for when we chose to serve our country. What makes them any different than retirement? Basically this is a load of Bravo Sierra.

Rich, NW Florida

8/23/2011 10:06:13 AM ET
As a 23-year veteran, this modification to the military retirement plan is preposterous. From an enlisted member on the ground and close to the pulse of our troops, this will be the demise of the world's greatest military.When we take the ULTIMATE oath and commitment to defend this country, we sacrifice a lot. We sacrifice the opportunity to enter the civilian workforce at a young age and work our way up the corporate ladder. Instead we place our life on the line for twenty plus years and then enter the civilian workforce at the age of forty plus, an age that most companies do not want to invest precious resources into to facilitate our climb up the corporate ladder climbdue to our age. As an enlisted member we are not taking about an enormous retirement check. an E-7 is retirement is close to 25,000 a year. In contrast, a California fireman can collect close to 100,000. I've been given anthrax vaccines and shots I cannot even pronounce. I've deployed to locations

SMSgt C, Fla

8/23/2011 10:02:20 AM ET
Most of us see the Defense Business Board as already breaking faith. You choose, at 10-14 years in, to stay for retirement, sacrificing double the potential civilian salary. And you might have to go home and tell your spouse "Guess what honey, I got a HUGE paycut today." If they could take away your retirement, who's to say they won't rob your 401K?

AF DOC, Lackland AFB

8/23/2011 9:58:32 AM ET
He can promise what he wants to, but Congress controls the purse strings.To all of you warriors who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, you should step back and realize that this entitlement mentality and resulting debt is breaking the back of our great nation. Yes, cuts need to be made in LOTS of other places, but our current retirement system is much too generous and if we are the selfless servants we claim to be we should be more than willing to set the example and lead the way. Of course our wounded veterans should always be taken care of but for the rest of us who can manage our money wisely and find other work when its time, we should. If we can't retain as many people after it changes so be it. If there is a real threat to our nation, enough people will volunteer. Right now debt is our enemy and we have to get our finances under control. Does anyone realize that one of Al-Qaeda's stated goals was to bleed us into bankruptcy Wake up people.

ADAF, NCR

8/23/2011 9:48:55 AM ET
1 percent paying for the other 99 percent as usual.

Dan, Idaho

8/23/2011 8:54:13 AM ET
In fiscal 2001 the DOD health care bill was $19 billion. It is more than $50 billion now, he said, and it soars to the neighborhood of $60 billion in future years. Our system is pretty much a single-payer healthcare program that may be the model for a national healthcare system. If costs have gone up this much, how much is a nationalized system going to cost taxpayers? I'm curious if anyone has done any serious studies on what a single-payer healthcare system will cost.

Lt Col, Eglin

8/23/2011 8:54:00 AM ET
@ Job Hunting CONUS- I could not help but reply to your posting of the 157 Majors twice passed over by the way who were unceremoniously dismissed from the AF with no benefits. Having worked on promotion boards and having seen how inflated our promotion system already is both enlisted and officer I cannot help think that these folks, while not criminals as they describe in the AF Times article, had one if not a few negative force indicators to keep them from promoting with their peers. As such they deserve to get the boot; with an over 90 percent promotion rate to O-4, they were the bottom 10 percent. what private industry do you know that would retain for 6 more years the bottom 10 percent of their work force? NONE. Why should the military carry these air thiefs along and issue them a paycheck when others with stellar records are being forced out due to personnel cuts. In this instance the AF got it right.

Capt..soon to be Maj, OCONUS

8/23/2011 7:35:56 AM ET
Some people are gullible. These same types of political figures said all vets would receive free health care for life. Now look.

Mark, USA

8/23/2011 5:38:52 AM ET
It already been said but I'll say it again. Lets talk about the congress payroll. How bout we start taking money out of the right pockets. Lets see some politian go through some basic training or deal with the 12 and 18 hour shifts the we all love so much. Lets see them deal with getting shot at, family hardship, on the job mishaps, the threat to life and limb on a day to day. How about a politian go through a little of that then he/she can come talk to me about if a member of the armed foces deserves what he/she is promised. No threat intended but if they keep up this kind of talk, they really might start getting shot at. lol

Some guy, CONUS

8/23/2011 5:25:39 AM ET
In 2002 the average pension for a member of the house of representatives ranged from 41,000 to 55,000. After serving in Congress for 5 years, a member of the House or Senate is entitled to full retirement benefits. These benefits include full health insurance coverage as well as pension benefits. Representatives and senators also set their own salaries. Congressmen may start collecting this at the age of 62 with five years of service, age 50 with 20 years, and may collect at any time after 25 years of service. Base salary figures in place as of 2009 range from 174,000-223,500. Salaries of representatives and senators are subject to annual cost of living increases. Interesting that Military pay is on the chopping block but in a seven year stretch Congress elected to more than quadruple their pay.

Jim, Kentucky

8/23/2011 4:03:53 AM ET
This is the most reasonable statement that I have heard from any public official since this debate started.

Dillette Lindo, Andrews AFB MD

8/23/2011 2:57:17 AM ET
I am very pleased to hear the secretary's stance on this. To those of you who are stating that Congress gets huge retirement benefits after one term, you are incorrect. This fallacy is getting a lot of traction from people spreading rumors that they hear. If you do some homework you will see that they don't get near as much as you are led to believe. I am not defending Congress, but delivering incorrect messages about their benefits is not in our best interest. It makes us look stupid.

Mike, Germany

8/23/2011 1:51:08 AM ET
I am happy to see the concern over benefits but wonder where the uproar was when they started charging retirees for their medical care? Sure the cost is low, that's not my point. The point is that when I joined, medical care for life was free, and now it is not. Faith was broken a long time ago.

Andy, Germany

8/22/2011 10:53:40 PM ET
Sounds like a lot of political propaganda to me... Probably willing to say anything to ease the anxiety of the military. Honestly how do they expect us to believe this when they say that the military would be the last to recieve cuts in the whole debt reduction scheme and we ened up being numero uno?

Creatively Maladjusted, Nellis AFB

8/22/2011 7:20:23 PM ET
I have to agree with several comments I see here. Stay 20 years to get your retirement. If you choose to separate prior to that you had more than enough opportunity to get something back in the form of education, TSP or any number of programs. Don't give me the excuse about being deployed all the time either. I have deployed plenty myself and had ample opportunity to finish an MBA using only military benefits associated with TA and the GI Bill. Second, I like the post about making congress serve 20 years to get a retirement. They could argue that they are voted in and so they might lose out on a retirement also, but how about we make them do the 401K idea? If they want a full pension, let them serve 20 years. If they do a good job, maybe we as citizens will continue to vote them into office. If they don't, we vote them out and they can enjoy their 401K benefits like they want us to do. I mean, they went out and served for 4 years so they should be compensated...right Ma

20yrMSgt, USA

8/22/2011 6:16:59 PM ET
You mean to tell me that in order to get the deficit down and make the DOD a more efficient effective and agile force - that can still deal with the threats of the future - one solution lies in attacking the 20 year retirement plan? You got to be kidding me.Additionally the Defense Secretary was quoted, "People who have come into the service who have put their lives on the line, who have been deployed to the war zones, who fought for this country, who have been promised certain benefits for that -- I'm not going to break faith with what's been promised to them." Panetta said.It almost seems as if only Airmen who have been tasked to deploy deserve to recieve retirement benefits. A wise man once said I'm not a star. Somebody lied. I got a chopper in the car... UGH ... If you haven't deployed yet you probably want to get a few under your belt... 'chopper-style'BTW - the gentleman in the red tie looks like he's sleeping... UGH

Blue Roples, JBSA

8/22/2011 4:59:04 PM ET
There is a way to have those future people have a retirement they can take with them. It's called TSP and its offered to every service member. If they want more people to be happy and have a retirement fund, advertise the TSP enrollment more and educate folks about it. If I want to stay for 20 for the retirement should, I get shafted because someone wants to whine about not getting anything when they leave before twenty years? I respond with "Why didn't you deposit part of your paycheck into TSP then?" Thank you for keeping the faith, Mr. Panetta

SSgt Kincaid, NE

8/22/2011 4:14:27 PM ET
Does anyone know if he has any actual athourity to be making this promise?

Joseph, Keesler AFB

8/22/2011 4:06:57 PM ET
Thank you Mr. Secretary. Finally someone who gets it. Maybe there is a glimmer of hope.

O in HI, Hi

8/22/2011 4:00:25 PM ET
Promises. Promises. I've heard this song and dance before. I'm dropping my papers at first opportunity.

Skeptical, Nellis AFB

8/22/2011 3:51:26 PM ET
If we are looking at keeping our benefits, how about taking care of the supplimental benfits? The BX and Commissary. If you look at the BX there is no 20 to 30 percent savings by shopping on base anylonger. I think it is rediculious that i have to use my Star card to get an additional 5 cents off a gallon of gas. Should be cheaper than off base and the card shouldn't matter. Can we getting the savings back in those areas.

Bud, USA

8/22/2011 3:37:14 PM ET
The issue that those who serve less than 20 years dont get a retirement is a distraction and a way to fairly justify cutting the 20-year plan. They know the rules if they choose to get out, that's on them. They are fairly compensated with education benefits among others. They can also open a TSP or Roth IRA if they want to save for retirement. Dont be fooled by the politicians this isn't to make the military retirement fair it's to cut costs at the detriment of those who voluntarily serve for 20 years. As others have pointed out we all should asking every congressmen what congressional benefits are being cut at every press conference, town hall meeting, and every time they grace us with visit downrange. Then watch how fast this becomes a non-issue.

MSgt K , Hickam AFB HI

8/22/2011 3:35:21 PM ET
Go figure Mr. Gates would make that recommendation before he got the boot...what did he care about...sounds like not the military. You want to start saving money. cut and slash the payroll for the dimwits in Congress first. Then we'll see some real progress being made for our economy.

Mark, CA

8/22/2011 2:44:11 PM ET
Sun Tzu said: There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army: By commanding the army to advance or to retreat being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army. By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds. By employing the officers of his army without discrimination

SSgt, Little Rock AFB

8/22/2011 2:33:16 PM ET
Breaking promises don't hold your breath... I was promised healthcare for life if I served 20 yrs now I pay for it and they want to increase the premiums. Military benifits are alway being attacked. Need to put congress benifits on line let the american citizens see when benifits they are giving our one time elected officials. Let us decide on what your entitled too.

Phil, Hill AFB UT

8/22/2011 1:51:39 PM ET
Let's start saving real US tax money & US lives by quickly winding down the 'sand box' operations. Can anyone point to a Tangible and Positive benefit the last several years of spending has bought? Thats right ... Zero. Time to pull our financial heads out of our 'sun don't shine' spot and save our tax dollars.

Paul R, San Antonio TX

8/22/2011 1:50:33 PM ET
The bigger question to ask is if someone who serves 4 years and gets out deserves some retirement to take with them. My answer would be an enthusiastic NO. Serving 4, 8 or 12 years is certainly admirable and is adequately rewarded with education benefits, job experience and VA benefits. Pensions should be reserved for those who spend an entire career making sacrifices for their country.

DC, MD

8/22/2011 1:40:51 PM ET
I agree with Mike from Virginia. The Executive and Legislative branch should all look at their retirement plan and see what they would like to trim from thier benefits after serving one term etc. Our presidents past, present and future receive very nice benefit packages after serving only 4 or 8 years. How would it be to serve that in the military and still get all the same benefits. Mr. Secretary, I hope you continue to represent the members of the military like you are because many of us our counting on you.

Glen, Utah

8/22/2011 1:34:42 PM ET
Reading what our new Secretary of Defense had to say regarding the retirement proposal is very refreshing. As a former Career Assistance Advisor I was deeply concerned about the initial report considering I spent countless hours with our First Term Airmen and those Second Term Airmen on the fence concerning their future. The number 1 selling point was the fact the Military was one of the few careers that offered a retirement. I fully realize that changes must be made to remain fiscally responsible but Secretary Panetta's comment of...not breaking faith...is definitely the right choice. Retirement is NOT a benefit...it's an earned entitlement for all that have honorably served 20 years or more.

SMSgt Michael Montgomery, Eglin AFB

8/22/2011 12:27:36 PM ET
Well all this does for me is give me flashbacks to the last time a Liberal was in the Whitehouse. While that gentleman was chasing Monica around the Oval Office, his beloved wife, our current Sec Of State, was busy trying to foist a socialist style of health care on the American people. The one area that she experienced any success was the impletmenting of Tricare, another of those vested benefits. When they say they will keep their end of the bargain about retirement, well I guess we will see. Also do I remember correctly? Didn't they try to drastically change the retirement system back in the 90's and didn't it not work then? I'm just saying...

Jesse Tiede MSgt , Lackland AFB TX

8/22/2011 12:21:45 PM ET
Big bamboozle. Talk is cheap. Current retirees have heard endearing support assertions all before. Remember legacy of official government rhetoric proudly proclaiming if you serve your country honorably the promised reward earned was a just retirement and free medical/dental care for life for defending a grateful nation. Mounting struggles to get a timely medical or dental appointment at any military treatment facility are not haphazard. Luck of draw and decline by design stealth entitlement care road blocking via indeterminate Space A ruse tempered by incompatible priorities or a retiree adverse attitude with thankless kick in their rotting teeth for your dedicated service is progressive norm not infrequent exception.

Old War Horse, Fort Pasture

8/22/2011 12:21:20 PM ET
What about breaking the faith of the 157 fully qualified majors who are being involuntarily separated at or after the 15 year point in their careers with no long term benefits? Since there's no precedent for this action in the last 20 years and DOD policy states that officers within 6 years of retirement should be continued, will Secretary Panetta be willing to overturn this decision?

Job Hunting, CONUS

8/22/2011 12:07:36 PM ET
There should not be ANY talk of cuts in the United States Military. We do our duty day in day and day out pushing for more efficiency with less resources. Our objects are achieved, missions successful, and national interests saved. The bottom line is Congress has fialed to meet several deadlines with real answers. They are not doing their jobs and should be fired. The nation which forgets its defenders shall itself be forgotten. Author unknown.

D, FedUpVille

8/22/2011 11:49:41 AM ET
We still need to address the unsustainability of the pension plan.

Analyst, Barksdale

8/22/2011 11:46:11 AM ET
If they want to cut spending make Fridays no fly days unless mission requires. Quit building bus stops in front of Ops Squadron buildings with heated sidewalks. Quit providing flightline exdpediters with 34-ton brand new chevys. Quit the retirement for congress after just one term make them give a 20 year commitment. It's a gamble we take that we will be able to enjoy our retirement when we sign the line and take the oath to serve most politicians don't take any gamble when they sign up for thier offices and know even if they are voted out of office that they will enjoy a retirement. If you have never served in the military capacity for more than 2 years then you should not be able to make policy about the military.

JB, AK

8/22/2011 11:42:27 AM ET
OK. Let's do this. we give up our retirement if America allows us to be the only ones to vote in members of congress. Both the senate and House. Regular Americans can only vote for President...If You Don't serve your country why should you get to pick who leads it

Damion T American, Hill airplane patch

8/22/2011 10:34:36 AM ET
When nobody is held accountable, anything can happen. There is no longer any foundation of trust with the government.The Department of Defense has already broken faith with me and the the terms of my service.I was promised free life-time medical care for myself and my family. I am now paying premiums for this benefit. The establishmenet is now considering raising those premiums and/or reducing the level of care provided.Before cutting my benefits I would charge that cost-cutting measures begin with Congressional salaries and perks because what's good for the gander is certainly good for the goose.VR/Suspicious and distrusting

Charles Maler, San Angelo TX

8/22/2011 8:43:54 AM ET
I know it's a "What If" question but....What if someone goes enlisted to officer would that be considered grandfathering in since the paygrade is O-1E, O-2E, O-3E? Just curious...

Brett, Lackland AFB

8/22/2011 8:01:33 AM ET
How about taking a look at the cost of the retirement Congress enjoys?

Mike, Virginia

8/22/2011 6:59:46 AM ET
I think Congress needs to look at the six figure salaries for life that they get for only doing one term. Leave the military retirement system alone.

TSgt. Pomilla, Little Rock AFB

8/22/2011 5:38:20 AM ET
In fiscal 2001 the DOD health care bill was $19 billion. It is more than $50 billion now, he said, and it soars to the neighborhood of $60 billion in future years. Well no kidding! That's what happens when you send us to war for 10 years. Don't send people to war then cut their health benefits when they come back unhealthy and maimed because it's too expensive to take care of them.

Anonymous, Overseas

8/22/2011 3:56:46 AM ET
This is the best news I have heard from Washington in the past three months. Our military members have sacrificed so much fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan it is only right that the retirement benefits they were promised are there for them when they hit their 20 year mark. There has been much debate recently about whether the military retirement is overly generous. I dont know if it is or isn't but I cant think of a more deserving group of people than those of our Armed forces.

SSgt DeBerry, Hickam AFB

8/21/2011 9:36:17 PM ET
If he leans back any farther he's gonna tip over in his chair...

George, Okinawa

8/21/2011 1:57:08 PM ET
I tried the TSP route. Flipped to an IRA in 2000. Market lost me 20,000 and never recovered. Check the news. We will have 70 year old ultimate vets with no resources.

Edward Flesch SMSgt Ret, Big Flats NY

8/21/2011 10:01:32 AM ET
Finally a good call. Those in service now should get what they signed up for.

TSgt JBB Iraq, Iraq

8/20/2011 3:52:45 PM ET
thank you...10 years ago i was one of two people in my basic training flight who raised their hand when asked who came into the air force for a career. i wasn't there for the education or health insurance or leave it was the 20 year retirement. thank you for someone high ranking that will finally stand up and say that you will not break faith with those few who wanted to come to the military for the service and career...not just the free college. i wanted to be a part of the profession at arms. thank you.

USAF 10 years in, turkey

8/20/2011 8:54:17 AM ET
I am so glad someone gets it.

Arthur Fritz, Okinawa Japan

8/20/2011 6:03:39 AM ET
A political appointee made a promise. I feel much better now.

Maj, look over here

8/20/2011 4:57:29 AM ET
Thank you Mr. Secretary. By making this clear statement you have not only have you put a great number of military members at ease you have assured that this financial crisis does not turn into a military manning crisis. I do feel for the next generation and I would expect some serious second order recruiting and retention effects.

Cautiously Relieved, CONUS

8/20/2011 1:32:59 AM ET
As if the recruiter's job wasn't hard enough we think about phasing-out the 20 year retirement option Hello draft... Seriously the average military career has way too many hardships, deploy-ments and other family sacrifices to create longer enlistments for retirement. I believe it will cause problems trying to keep senior ranks and experienced managers.

Jack Harris, Fort Worth TX

8/20/2011 1:28:45 AM ET
I pray that is a promise the SecDef can keep.

Brian, earth

8/19/2011 10:23:43 PM ET
We need to think long and hard about the way we do business in the AF before we think about cutting benefits. For example how many squadrons do you know that go out and spend 20K on new plasmas just to use up all their end of year funds? I personally think this is criminal...and CCs should be held accountable. All leadership in the chain is guilty of these types of Fraud, Waste and Abuse. Let's cut some of this ridiculous spending. All AF senior leadership needs to take a course with Dave Ramsey.

Maj, DC

8/19/2011 5:36:48 PM ET
I wonder if Panetta or anyone on the Board have read the feedback from active duty and retired troops regarding this insane subject. We are not a corporate structure with corporate jobs. 40 hour work week? Ha. Safe everyday in our cubicle? Ha. Don't need incentives like a younger retirement after being shot at, wounded, having our families suffer from repeated deployments, etc. You idiots are going to destroy the military. Watch your recruiting numbers if you choose this insanity. You and our country will be very sorry. That I promise.

john, FL

8/19/2011 4:42:44 PM ET
Don't touch retirement. There are plenty of other things to cut long before getting near the DoD and if we're eventually put on the chopping block there is absolutely no need to cut anything related to personnel when there are so many needless things we can get rid of. On behalf of the less than 1 percent of Americans who willingly put their life on the line for their country and ask for so little in return use some common sense for once and don't even think about threatening military retirement. Putting it off as only affecting future members of the force is BS - those future members deserve the very same benefits as those serving today.

Chris, New York

Add a comment

Inside AF.mil

GeneralImagesVideo

View All RSS

Subscribe AF.MIL

More Headlines

Cadet places 3rd among her age group at Ironman World Championship

National Guard assists governors of states in Sandy's path

California Air Guard members prepare to assist with Hurricane Sandy response

Outreach to teach: Volunteers connect with Afghan children | VIDEO

Missing for 46 years, air commando laid to rest

Air mobility response team readies for 'Sandy'

As Sandy closes in, Mobility Airmen stand ready

Air Force Week in Photos

U.K. F-35 fleet increases capability at Eglin AFB

Avon Park Air Force Range receives Interior Secretary award

Former Little Rock AFB commander and spouse receive 2012 O'Malley award

Reservist sets latest mark in battle for Schriever track record

CSAF shares perspective during AETC Senior Leader Conference

Thule boilers save big in first year

Commentary

Teal ropes to spotlight sexual assault response 37

Air Force Academy energy research will yield global benefits