House OKs bill to restore military pension benefits

WASHINGTON - The House voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to restore full cost of -living increases to pension benefits for younger military retirees, responding to election-year pressure from veterans groups.

The Senate debated a similar bill as lawmakers hastened to reverse course on the most contentious cut contained in budget legislation approved less than two months ago.

Approval of the measure was never in doubt in the House, where the final vote was 326-90. The four representatives from Arkansas, all Republicans, voted in favor of the measure.

Rep. Tim Griffin of Arkansas said in a statement that the pension cuts have to be reversed, but in a way that cuts the deficit.

“I said from the beginning that cutting military retirees’ pensions was bad policy, and I’m glad we’ve done the right thing and reversed these scheduled reductions,” he said. “America must address out-of control entitlement spending, but we must keep the promises we’ve made to current veterans, seniors and retirees.”

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., argued that overturning last year’s relatively modest change in pensions would eventually cause military readiness to erode as the Pentagon struggles to adjust to budget restrictions.

“We’ve got to make some hard choices. This bill doesn’t do it. It punts in every conceivable way,” he said.

Under the bill in the Republican-controlled House, a cut in cost-of-living increases for military retirees under age 62 would be eliminated before it is scheduled to take effect in 2015. The $7 billion cost of the measure would be more than offset by extending pre-existing cuts in Medicare and other government programs for an additional year, through 2024.

The change to cost-of living benefits was part of a budget bill that Congress approved late last year, and several lawmakers in both parties said at the time that they would attempt to reverse it quickly in the new year.

At issue was retirement income for veterans with at least 20 years of military service. The Pentagon’s figures show nearly 2 million retirees receive pensions at an annual cost to the government of $4.5 billion a year. Of them, about 840,000 are under 62 and would be affected by the legislation that passed in December to hold annual cost of-living benefits one percentage point below the rate of inflation beginning next year.

Critics of the change said that would mean a reduction of nearly $72,000 in benefits over a lifetime for a sergeant first class who retires at age 42.

The legislation in the Democratic-controlled Senate also would restore the full cost of-living increase but would push federal deficits higher because it lacks reductions elsewhere in the budget.

Republicans sought to change that with a proposal by New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte to require Social Security numbers for any children whose parents seek a low-income tax credit. She said the result would be to increase federal revenue by $20 billion over a decade while simultaneously cracking down on fraud by illegal aliens.

Democratic opposition to her proposal left its fate uncertain, and no votes on the bill were expected before today at the earliest.

Election-year politics were involved in the measure in both houses. Senate Democrats in difficult re-election races signed on as leading sponsors of the legislation, including Sens. Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Mark Begich of Alaska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.

In the House, some Republicans were relieved that the measure was coming to a vote as a stand-alone bill rather than as part of a measure to raise the debt limit as the GOP leadership initially proposed.

Several officials said Arkansas Rep. Tom Cotton, who is running for the Senate, had spoken out against combining the two in a private meeting of the rank and file Monday night. They said the congressman noted that the proposed strategy meant lawmakers who wanted to oppose an unpopular debt-limit increase also would be voting against the politically popular pension change at the same time.

The officials who described his remarks did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose details of the meeting.

After the House vote Tuesday, Cotton said the House reversed the cuts in a fiscally responsible way.

“Our troops have sacrificed repeatedly to defend our country and, of all groups, they should have never been singled out for retroactive pension cuts. Senate Democrats should stop using veterans as a political pawn and pass this legislation immediately,” he said in a statement.

Pryor disagreed with claims that his bill is politically driven.

“This wasn’t election-year politics, party politics,” Pryor said.

Pryor said not voting for the spending bill in January would have harmed veterans and active duty service members, as well as many others.

On the Senate floor Tuesday afternoon, Pryor urged passage of his bill by reading letters from Arkansas veterans who want the pension funding restored.

“I could go on for a long time,” Pryor said. “Let’s for crying out loud not send the message … that we’re going to balance the budget on their backs.” Information for this article was contributed by David Espo of The Associated Press and by Sarah D. Wire of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.