Posted on Jan 19, 2015
State of the Union unlikely to focus on military
5.33K
35
10
5
5
0
From: Marine Corps Times
On Tuesday night, veterans groups and defense watchers will once again carefully dissect the president's annual State of the Union speech to Congress for any mention of their policy priorities.
They're likely to be disappointed.
Military and veterans issues haven't commanded much of the annual address since the start of Barack Obama's presidency. On average, just under half of President George W. Bush's speeches dealt with foreign policy and national security. Obama has spent less than a quarter of his time on those topics, a reflection of the winding down of the wars overseas.
Still, lawmakers and lobbyists insist just a passing mention of a topic or bill can boost its legislative profile and redouble its chances of success. White House officials haven't confirmed all the details in this year's speech, but here are some military-themed items to expect to be mentioned — and ignored:
IN: Iraq and Afghanistan
Obama has talked about the service and sacrifice of troops overseas and military families back home in each of his State of the Union addresses.
This year, he'll highlight the end of combat operations in Afghanistan as one of his major foreign policy accomplishments, even as critics question whether that nation is ready to move ahead without more U.S. military support.
The rising threat of Islamic militants in Iraq and Syria will be another discussion point, especially with more than 2,000 U.S. troops again serving in that war-torn region. Obama has taken criticism from Congress both for acting too quickly and too slowly in the region, and will continue to press his justification for American intervention in the region.
OUT: Sequestration
In his speech two years ago, Obama called on Congress to find a solution to the looming spending cuts mandated under the 2011 Budget Control Act, saying the "arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness."
That plea resulted in only a temporary budget work-around to the problem, not the permanent solution lawmakers have been promising for the last three years.
Last year's State of the Union didn't directly mention sequestration, and Obama is more likely to fold concerns about military spending into the larger federal budget fights. The new Republican Congress has promised to make the issue a top defense priority, but offered few new solutions on the issue.
IN: VA reforms
The Veterans Affairs Department's patient wait time scandals made national headlines and forced the resignation of a Cabinet secretary. Even though VA's problems have not commanded the same recent attention as issues like immigration and federal spending, it's still a major focus of lawmakers, who have already passed two veterans-related measures out of the House.
Veterans groups don't expect any major policy changes, but do expect Obama to at least mention some of the reforms already put in place in the wake of those scandals.
OUT: Military pay and benefits
For many outside advocates, the impending report from the Military Retirement and Compensation Modernization Commission is the biggest news of the year, potentially setting in motion major changes to military pay and benefits for years to come.
But Obama's White House has barely mentioned the issue in its regular press briefings, and the report simply may be too service-specific to draw national attention. Administration officials likely will have plenty to say after the report is released next month, but are likely to stay quiet until then.
IN: Cyber terrorism
The recent attacks on Sony Pictures by digital troublemakers and the hacking of U.S. Central Command's social media sites have refocused attention on the issue of cybersecurity, and the president is expected to use that platform to repeat his requests for better legislative action on the topic.
The White House already has announced a summit on cybersecurity and consumer protection at Stanford University in February, with the goal of guiding public- and private-sector efforts to find better protections.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2015/01/19/state-of-the-union-veterans-troops/21803759/
On Tuesday night, veterans groups and defense watchers will once again carefully dissect the president's annual State of the Union speech to Congress for any mention of their policy priorities.
They're likely to be disappointed.
Military and veterans issues haven't commanded much of the annual address since the start of Barack Obama's presidency. On average, just under half of President George W. Bush's speeches dealt with foreign policy and national security. Obama has spent less than a quarter of his time on those topics, a reflection of the winding down of the wars overseas.
Still, lawmakers and lobbyists insist just a passing mention of a topic or bill can boost its legislative profile and redouble its chances of success. White House officials haven't confirmed all the details in this year's speech, but here are some military-themed items to expect to be mentioned — and ignored:
IN: Iraq and Afghanistan
Obama has talked about the service and sacrifice of troops overseas and military families back home in each of his State of the Union addresses.
This year, he'll highlight the end of combat operations in Afghanistan as one of his major foreign policy accomplishments, even as critics question whether that nation is ready to move ahead without more U.S. military support.
The rising threat of Islamic militants in Iraq and Syria will be another discussion point, especially with more than 2,000 U.S. troops again serving in that war-torn region. Obama has taken criticism from Congress both for acting too quickly and too slowly in the region, and will continue to press his justification for American intervention in the region.
OUT: Sequestration
In his speech two years ago, Obama called on Congress to find a solution to the looming spending cuts mandated under the 2011 Budget Control Act, saying the "arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness."
That plea resulted in only a temporary budget work-around to the problem, not the permanent solution lawmakers have been promising for the last three years.
Last year's State of the Union didn't directly mention sequestration, and Obama is more likely to fold concerns about military spending into the larger federal budget fights. The new Republican Congress has promised to make the issue a top defense priority, but offered few new solutions on the issue.
IN: VA reforms
The Veterans Affairs Department's patient wait time scandals made national headlines and forced the resignation of a Cabinet secretary. Even though VA's problems have not commanded the same recent attention as issues like immigration and federal spending, it's still a major focus of lawmakers, who have already passed two veterans-related measures out of the House.
Veterans groups don't expect any major policy changes, but do expect Obama to at least mention some of the reforms already put in place in the wake of those scandals.
OUT: Military pay and benefits
For many outside advocates, the impending report from the Military Retirement and Compensation Modernization Commission is the biggest news of the year, potentially setting in motion major changes to military pay and benefits for years to come.
But Obama's White House has barely mentioned the issue in its regular press briefings, and the report simply may be too service-specific to draw national attention. Administration officials likely will have plenty to say after the report is released next month, but are likely to stay quiet until then.
IN: Cyber terrorism
The recent attacks on Sony Pictures by digital troublemakers and the hacking of U.S. Central Command's social media sites have refocused attention on the issue of cybersecurity, and the president is expected to use that platform to repeat his requests for better legislative action on the topic.
The White House already has announced a summit on cybersecurity and consumer protection at Stanford University in February, with the goal of guiding public- and private-sector efforts to find better protections.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2015/01/19/state-of-the-union-veterans-troops/21803759/
Posted in these groups: 
Government
Government
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
5
5
0
I prefer to respond to what happens. Speculating on anticipated events only serves to fuel heart attacks...
(5)
(0)
3
3
0
I think the speech will be more optimistic towards the economy and how to move forward with the new Congress. Will he address the military, yes. Only to acknowledge the end of the Afghan war and to stay vigilant for preparation towards ISIS. This speech is going to be uneventful to say the least. Will the President propose an agenda that helps all but seems unrealistic for the GOP? Yes. But I think he's focuses on his legacy.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
It's indicative of an increasingly detached and decreasingly engaged administration. This president and his advisors have essentially been in lame duck status since the election of 2012. Their relevance has dropped nearly to the status of buffoonery when it comes to anything like foreign policy, diplomacy, brinkmanship or accountability.
If the VA reforms that are to be trumpeted are, in fact, a step forward, I'll ease my vitriol a bit. But McDonald and company have a long, long way to go to make DVA functional and robust. If VA wants to really be relevant, they need to take a long, cold, hard look at the levels of bureaucracy between the treatment centers and the DVA itself and excise the redundancies.
As for pay and benefits, the writing's been on the wall for a long time. I don't like to see it considered, let alone enacted, but politicians of this day and age only rarely have a direct involvement in military service, let alone combat operations. Very few have any real appreciation of the sacrifices service members and their families endure year after year.
The president may say combat operations are over in Afghan, but we still have people in and out of uniform there, just as we do in Iraq and neither of those things will change unless its to plus up those numbers. Read: I don't see us turning our back on either place anytime soon, even if the level of involvement is low intensity or under the radar.
What I would like to hear, although I doubt I will, is the status of the much ballyhooed 'pivot to Southeast Asia'. Where are we on that? Anywhere? Does anyone really care? I don't get the idea many actually do.
If the VA reforms that are to be trumpeted are, in fact, a step forward, I'll ease my vitriol a bit. But McDonald and company have a long, long way to go to make DVA functional and robust. If VA wants to really be relevant, they need to take a long, cold, hard look at the levels of bureaucracy between the treatment centers and the DVA itself and excise the redundancies.
As for pay and benefits, the writing's been on the wall for a long time. I don't like to see it considered, let alone enacted, but politicians of this day and age only rarely have a direct involvement in military service, let alone combat operations. Very few have any real appreciation of the sacrifices service members and their families endure year after year.
The president may say combat operations are over in Afghan, but we still have people in and out of uniform there, just as we do in Iraq and neither of those things will change unless its to plus up those numbers. Read: I don't see us turning our back on either place anytime soon, even if the level of involvement is low intensity or under the radar.
What I would like to hear, although I doubt I will, is the status of the much ballyhooed 'pivot to Southeast Asia'. Where are we on that? Anywhere? Does anyone really care? I don't get the idea many actually do.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google