Congress Just Averted Military Cuts With This Sneaky Method

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-99903155/stock-photo-military-and-businessman-handshake.html?src=J3muPOqWphfLIRSv97gPQQ-1-1">Straight 8 Photography</a>/Shutterstock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Members of Congress from both parties have decided to temporarily ignore their usual deficit mania to assuage military vets. In a new 1,582-page bill that doles out spending to the entire federal government for 2014, Congress slipped in a sneaky measure that essentially keeps military pensions from counting against the deficit by ignoring the normal rules of government spending.

Here’s the backstory of how that came to be: When Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) struck a budget deal last month, they did their best to slice everything straight down the middle, dividing their competing plans in two at certain points. When they raised sequestration caps, the cuts were lifted equally from domestic and military spending, this despite the fact the military’s budget is already bloated.

The same logic applied to revenue measures to offset that new spending. The deal called for new federal government hires to contribute more of their salaries to their pensions, amounting to $6 billion in new revenue over the next decade. Ryan and Murray equalized that with $6 billion from decreasing future benefits in military pensions—an idea that originated in Murray’s office. Ryan initially wanted all of those revenues to come from federal employees, but Murray convinced him to split it evenly with the military, a feat her staff trumpeted as a get for the Democrats in the budget deal.

Republicans instantly hated the measure and Democrats soon abandoned their support for the military cuts—derived from a downward shift in cost-of-living calculations. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) introduced a bill to ditch the changes for the military and replace them by closing tax loopholes. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, vowed to examine the cuts when the senate returned from its winter break. Sens. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C), two vulnerable Democrats up for reelection in 2014, teamed up to call for an outright repeal. Murray wobbled and said the cuts could also be overturned.

That process started Monday night with the release of a new omnibus spending bill. The legislation erases the cost-of-living adjustments for disabled, pre-retirement veterans and for survivor benefits, bumping the growth of future payments back to a higher level. That move increases the spending from the Ryan-Murray deal, seemingly a no-no for Republicans who had insisted that any deal be deficit-neutral. But instead of finding cuts elsewhere, Congress just declared that funding for the military shouldn’t be scored against the deficit like other programs.

“The budgetary effects of this section shall not be entered on any PAYGO scorecard,” the relevant section of the bill reads, referencing the congressional rules that mandate new revenues to offset any new spending. The new bill doesn’t cancel the entire cut to military pensions, but they don’t go into effect until 2015, so there’s still plenty of time for Congress to make further adjustments while pretending the costs don’t exist. Of course these new PAYGO standards don’t apply to all programs equally. The $6 billion in cuts for other federal employees remain in place. Chances are slim that they’ll be granted the same waiver.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate