Panetta: Any Retirement Changes Won’t Affect Serving Military

WASHINGTON, Aug. 19, 2011 — 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.

Defense Sec­re­tary Leon E. Panet­ta, right, holds a round­table dis­cus­sion with mem­bers of the press in his office at the Pen­ta­gon, 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 by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jacob N. Bai­ley
Click to enlarge

“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 it’s 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. 

U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →