Air Force Secretary stands up to protect BAH eligibility.

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:26:25 -0400

In response to recent talks about changing BAH eligibility for service members, the Air Force Secretary speaks out against the change.

What are your thoughts on this act and the issue at hand?

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/benefits/pay/allowances/2015/07/16/dont-change-bah-eligibility/30232701/

CW5 Charlie Poulton LTC John Shaw Sgt David G Duchesneau TSgt Hunter Logan CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. SPC Jeff Daley, PhD SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL CPT John Hermida PO1 John Miller SGT Private RallyPoint Member SGT Kristin Wiley CPT Private RallyPoint Member COL Mikel J. Burroughs Capt Richard I P. MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca Capt Seid Waddell GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad @ch (cpt) William

Air Force secretary: Don't change BAH eligibility

The Senate-proposed fiscal 2016 National Defense Authorization Act Section 604 language regarding Basic Allowance for Housing creates a division among service members and needs to be removed.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jul 16 at 2015 4:37 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:37:20 -0400

Good, that section was completely asinine, and if this were the civilian sector wouldn't stand up to any scrutiny. Just because we call it an "allowance" doesn't mean BAH is not part of a Service Member's total Compensation Package.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 16 at 2015 4:39 PM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:39:31 -0400

I'm out of up votes for the day but I'll get you tomorrow. I applaud Madam Secretary James and hope that her fellow Secretaries back her, as well as the military heads of the branches/Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jul 16 at 2015 4:41 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:41:04 -0400

It sounds like one of the unanticipated consequences might have been that couples wouldn't get married.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jul 16 at 2015 4:49 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:49:45 -0400

I'm glad to hear it or in this case read it. However, I hope her comments are not in category of too little, too late. The words "negative retention impact", don't strike me as particularly forceful. Especially when it is followed by "we are mindful of the budget pressures" and "cuts to BAH are not the kind of reductions our troops deserve". She needs to start using active words like Serious, Immediate, Necessary, Failure, etc.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Jul 16 at 2015 4:55 PM

LTC John Shaw — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:55:05 -0400

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member There is nothing in the verbiage that says it, but this strikes me as ARSE covering, it is already baked into the legislation. Perhaps she was not aware...I don't buy it, the service secretaries continuously massage legislation, especially the USAF who make a profession out of legislative aids.

Response by MSgt David Haupt made Jul 16 at 2015 5:16 PM

MSgt David Haupt — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:16:49 -0400

She is covering her own arse on this subject.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 5:51 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:51:11 -0400

I saw that article yesterday. I was glad to see that Chief Cody was speaking up and that Secretary James was also voicing disapproval.

Response by 1stSgt Jon Vance made Jul 16 at 2015 7:38 PM

1stSgt Jon Vance — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 19:38:12 -0400

Imagine if this impacted same sex couples who are dual military and married, suddenly there would be a firestorm because of this hot button issue. I think this is back peddling from an unintended consequence and arse covering.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 9:54 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 21:54:46 -0400

ECONOMICS!!! BAH is a privilege... Cant afford to live off-base, Don't! Just because "it" has been this way in the past doesnt mean it is the correct way. Budget trimming time...BAH needs cut along with sooo many other frivolously expensive "ways-of-life" in the military. Its coming, embrace the suck!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 9:58 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 21:58:25 -0400

Have you ever thought about why the Air Force has less problems with their personnel than other branches? Each branch has their own agenda and will not sway from it, one iota. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the Air Force is accruing their funds from the other branches. I don't know about the military, but in the civilian world, if you are given a budget and you don't use it all, you won't be allowed the same budget the following year. Maybe the Air Force is better at using all of their budget , so the next year, they can increase their budget. Just a thought.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 10:16 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 22:16:29 -0400

No I don't agree to these cuts as it bah acts in the place of me paying rent. If this goes through signal soldiers should have to pay rent for their barracks..

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Jul 17 at 2015 8:00 AM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 08:00:27 -0400

I am glad the AFS cares, because someone needs to. If the government wants to cut some costs, why don't they stop granting funds so scientist can build treadmills for shrimp from the ocean for research?
http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2014/11/shrimp_on_a_treadmill_worthwhi.html