I remember reading in a thread in GD that Bush’s budget had provisions to lower hazard pay for those in the military, as well as cut benefits for families of those killed in action
I cannot find the thread, or find any cites…can anyone confirm/deny this statement, and provide cites for proof?
thanks
Here’s an article from July of last year that doesn’t mention any cuts, although it does give some useful information about the different types of payment. There are several that could be interpreted as ‘hazard pay’ but apply to different situations. If anyone is talking about the ‘hazard pay’ of soldiers being cut, you should ask exactly which type they’re talking about.
I’m pretty sure that since Bush declared victory in May that soldiers are no longer receiving combat-duty pay.
What I am certain of is that soldiers are no longer eligible for wartime commendations because of the declared end of combat operations in May.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4052404/
Maybe there will be some former or current military people who know more about the commendations, but I believe that peacetime medals do not count as much towards promotions as do wartime medals…
From this article in The Army Times.
Notice that that article says that the administration wants to roll back the modest increase. They still want to increase the imminent danger pay, just not as much. This is much different than cutting.
And as for doubling the $6,000 gratuity paid to families, they aren’t looking to eliminate it, just not increase it. Most service personnel carry SGLI (life insurance. IIRC it was 8 dollars a month per $100K of coverage). Usually, it’s $200K. So, family members are not being left out in the cold.
And getting shot at is not a requirement for imminent danger pay. Being in a region that qualifies for imminent danger pay gets you imminent danger pay. Whether someone shoots at you or not.
A small clarification. Separation pay is not for those in a combat zone. It is for anyone deployed and separated from their family. This includes places like Kosovo and Korea. The editorial in Army Times mentions people getting shot at to emphasize a point.
To consolidate several previous posts, short answer: The Administration basically proposed in September 2003 that temporary increases in combat pay and family separation allowance be allowed to expire. Congress did not agree, and kept the increases for another year.
Longer answer: In March 2003, the Senate voted to increase combat pay from $150 to $225 per month, and family separation pay from $100 to $250 a month, as has been mentioned before.
As part of the $87 billion supplemental request for Iraq, the White House proposed that those increases expire.
Congress disagreed and continued the increased rates of pay through the current fiscal year.
(See the little bit at Section 1104)
Nope…I’m definitely getting mine. 
Jman