Last week, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr., and Army Secretary Pete Geren testified before the House and Senate Armed Services Committees as well as the House Appropriations Committee on the state of the Army and the Army’s budget   Their message at all three hearings was consistent.  "The cumulative effects of the last six-plus years at war have left our Army out of balance, consumed by the current fight and unable to do the things we know we need to do to properly sustain our all-volunteer force and restore our flexibility for an uncertain future," said Gen. Casey in his prepared testimony and opening statement. 

Both Gen. Casey and Secretary Geren testified that the Army plans to cut tours in Iraq from 15 months to 12 in July as the drawdown of forces from a surge high of 20 brigade combat teams drops to 15.

When asked by Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., whether the Army could continue to keep force levels at 15 brigade combat teams or about 130,000 soldiers, Gen. Casey said it could.

In the past, active duty soldiers serving year-long tours would often be back with their families for a year before deploying again.  Secretary Geren and Gen. Casey said the 15-month tours and the adding of more brigade combat teams over the next several years would allow more time between deployments.

“So the most important thing for us right now is to return to 12- month deployments.  And our goal is to do that after we see what General [David] Petraeus says here in April,’’ Gen. Casey said.

Until that happens, Sen. Levin said the Army is “way overstretched” and voiced his concern over readiness, recruiting standards and the loss of mid-grade noncommissioned officers and captains.

Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said he was concerned about the psychological impact on soldiers who were being “rapidly cycled through combat.”

In the hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., committee chairman echoed those concerns: “I would add that we appear to be out of balance and walking on a tightrope.  The consequences of falling are unpredictable, but likely grave, and certainly are a gamble that we can ill afford.”

As he did before the Senate panel, Secretary Geren said about balance, “We aren't where we need to be right now.  And some of it's a question of organizing, but part of it's just a question of dwell time -- having the soldiers home long enough to where they can do the COIN [counterinsurgency] mission, but also stay fully qualified in their MOS.

“And we have moved soldiers -- folks out of artillery, and taught them to be MPs; and have reorganized, across all three components, to meet this demand and try to give more soldiers the opportunity to deploy,” he added.

Before the Senate panel, Secretary Geren said that one way to handle a pause in drawing down American forces after July would be to continue using “stop-loss.” There are between 7,000 and 8,000 soldiers still serving under that policy.

He said, "We are consuming readiness now, as quickly as we're building it.”

In his prepared testimony, Secretary Geren said, “While our reserve components are performing magnificently, many RC units have found themselves assigned missions for which they were not originally intended nor adequately resourced.”  Adding, “Current operational requirements for forces and insufficient time between deployments require a focus on counterinsurgency training and equipping to the detriment of preparedness for the full range of military missions.”

Gen. Casey said, “We are unable to provide a sustainable tempo of deployments for our soldiers and families.  Soldiers, families, support systems, and equipment are stretched and stressed by the demands of lengthy and repeated deployments, with insufficient recovery time.  Equipment used repeatedly in harsh environments is wearing out more rapidly than programmed.”

As he did before the House Appropriations Committee earlier, Secretary Geren urged the Congress to move quickly on the $100 billion emergency spending bill for the current fiscal year.

At the Senate hearing a number of committee members questioned the cost of the Army’s Future Combat System.

“I think you’ve got a problem if the secretary honestly feels he can’t fund” FCS, Sen. Reed said.  He was referring to comments made by Defense Secretary Robert Gates at a hearing earlier this year that the program may not be affordable.

Secretary Geren said the program never accounts for more than one twelfth of the Army budget. “We believe the Future Combat System is exactly the full-spectrum system we need for the future,” Gen. Casey said.  He added the Army has begun limited testing of FCS at Fort Bliss, Texas through its 900-member Experimentation Task Force.

The Army puts the cost of fielding FCS at $160 billion

 

Quality of Military Recruits Questioned During Hearing

Another hearing held last week before the House Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee focused on the quality of military recruits and the ongoing stress on the force and military families as a result of repeated deployments.

Subcommittee Chairwoman Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif., and Ranking Member John McHugh, R-N.Y., both expressed their concern about what Rep. Davis called “sacrifices in recruit quality”.  Rep. McHugh said he shared “the concern of many about the new recruits who do not meet the time-tested DoD quality standards.” 

Dr. David Chu, Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness said that the quality of concern is “largely in the Army and is largely about the proportion [of new recruits] that are high school graduates.  But he insisted that all the military recruits were “high school graduates” because they had passed the General Education Development exam. 

Questioned about the increased numbers of moral waivers, Dr. Chu said that it reflected a society in which more young people have experimented with drugs.  But he also cited an Army study that showed recruits that were granted moral waivers "performed as well or even better" than other soldiers while in service.  Waivers are granted only after several layers of review.

All of the military services met their recruiting goals last year and expect to do so again this year with the help of bonuses and increasing benefits.

During a discussion with the Subcommittee on the importance of the military family, Dr. Chu asked Congress for their support for three AUSA-supported family programs – improving “transferability” of the GI Bill to spouses and children; providing “career” opportunities for spouses in the workforce; and accelerating child daycare access. 

 

Just the Facts

AUSA has received numerous inquiries recently about a recommendation included in the final report of the Commission on the National Guard and Reserve which calls for scrapping the entire military retirement system and making active duty troops wait until at least age 57 to begin drawing retired pay.

Instead of sticking to its original mission of reviewing the structure and management of the reserve components, the Commission delved into personnel polices of active duty members.

Under the commission’s plan, a revamped retired system would grant limited retirement benefits starting at 10 years of service, although payments would not begin until age 62. Those who serve at least 20 years could receive payments at age 60; those who serve 30 years could get them at age 57. 

Under the plan, troops could begin drawing retirement pay at earlier ages, but the annuity would be reduced 5 percent for each year that a member is under the statutory minimum retirement age.

To date, the misguided recommendation to scrap the current active duty retirement system has not found any support within Congress or Pentagon. 

AUSA vehemently opposes the recommendation.  Please be assured that if we do see any indication that the recommendation is being taken seriously, we will engage Congress and the Department of Defense at its highest levels.