Spouse Tuition Assistance Halted

[picklesuit]

Normally I don't like using the Navy Enquirer for a source document, but this story touches a little closer than most of their BS. Basically, the program providing TA to our spouses has been halted (temporarily? we don't know) and this affects the 98,000 spouses enrolled. Oh, and registration for
second quarter is about a month away...not much time to get alternate funding...WAY TO GO NAVY!!!

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/02/military_spousetuition_halt_021710w/

 

[Brett327]

Normally I don't like using the Navy Enquirer for a source document, but this story touches a little closer than most of their BS. Basically, the program providing TA to our spouses has been halted (temporarily? we don't know) and this affects the 98,000 spouses enrolled. Oh, and registration for
second quarter is about a month away...not much time to get alternate funding...WAY TO GO NAVY!!!

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/02/military_spousetuition_halt_021710w/

I'd rather they cut things like that rather than shutting entire squadrons down for two months at a time again because there's not enough OPTAR to go around. Operational hard deck anyone?

Brett

 

[phrogpilot73]

I'd rather they cut things like that rather than shutting entire squadrons down for two months at a time again because there's not enough OPTAR to go around. Operational hard deck anyone?

Different line of funding. Do I agree with it either way? I don't know - it would have been nice to know I was eligible for some cash to help with the masters (rather than pay out of pocket like I did last year), but the fact that A/C are grounded doesn't play into this. If you want to blame it on anything, blame it on how the federal budget works.

 

[navy09]

I didn't even know this existed, but it seems retarded. I can understand receiving certain benefits (ie health care) for happening to be married to a servicemember, but come on...

 

[phrogpilot73]

I didn't even know this existed, but it seems retarded. I can understand receiving certain benefits (ie health care) for happening to be married to a servicemember, but come on...

As a non-traditional dependent, I'll weigh in on this one. I gave up a very successful career in the USMC to follow the wife around. My understanding is this program's intent is to help spouse's re-train for a "portable" career. Remove the fact that I'm someone in the military, and you can realize that my pursuit of a portable career (culinary school) is $36,000. Do you want to pay this? I don't. I'm using post 9/11 GI Bill for it, but what if I wasn't able to?

 

[Brett327]

Different line of funding. Do I agree with it either way? I don't know - it would have been nice to know I was eligible for some cash to help with the masters (rather than pay out of pocket like I did last year), but the fact that A/C are grounded doesn't play into this. If you want to blame it on anything, blame it on how the federal budget works.

Normally that would be a correct statement, but because of overall overexpenditure by DoD and DoN in FY '09 in the C5F AOR, there has been a lot of co-mingling of funds to make the numbers work and previously "untouchable" lines of accounting have been adjusted accordingly. As long as that's the case, I'm all for raiding the more discretionary lines of accounting like TA in order to minimize the impact of the OPTAR cuts. Believe me, it's been happening for the past 18 months.

Brett

 

[Flash]

As a non-traditional dependent, I'll weigh in on this one. I gave up a very successful career in the USMC to follow the wife around. My understanding is this program's intent is to help spouse's re-train for a "portable" career. Remove the fact that I'm someone in the military, and you can realize that my pursuit of a portable career (culinary school) is $36,000. Do you want to pay this? I don't. I'm using post 9/11 GI Bill for it, but what if I wasn't able to?

Since it is taxpayer money, we would be paying for it. I am all for helping out spouses but there is a limit to what we can do, especially when it comes to the almost certain looming money crunch that DoD will face. I am with Brett, cut the extraneous stuff first, especially since it all does come from the big DoD budget anyways.

So, want some fries with that?

Normally that would be a correct statement, but because of overall overexpenditure by DoD and DoN in FY '09 in the C5F AOR, there has been a lot of co-mingling of funds to make the numbers work and previously "untouchable" lines of accounting have been adjusted accordingly. As long as that's the case, I'm all for raiding the more discretionary lines of accounting like TA in order to minimize the impact of the OPTAR cuts. Believe me, it's been happening for the past 18 months.

Brett

Longer than that, I saw the Marines do some funny/possibly illegal accounting stuff in Iwakuni and C5F do the same when I was in Bahrain.

 

[Brett327]

Longer than that, I saw the Marines do some funny/possibly illegal accounting stuff in Iwakuni and C5F do the same when I was in Bahrain.

Like taking away the per-diem their troops are legally entitled to? It's part of the pervasive culture of "legitimized" thievery which is rationalized in the name of "doing more with less." Yeah, we could all do more with less if we're constantly stealing from our shipmates. I'm sure several Marines in Iwakuni are proud to be doing more with less by reducing their personal budget for bicycles by stealing them from deployed squadrons. It's a morally bankrupt way to operate.

Brett

 

[navy09]

I'm sure several Marines in Iwakuni are proud to be doing more with less by reducing their personal budget for bicycles by stealing them from deployed squadrons. It's a morally bankrupt way to operate.Brett

LMAO. Rep for bringing up one of my favorite running AWs jokes.

 

[Brett327]

I wasn't aware my tax dollars were going to fund a military spouses education. Perhaps, if they want thier education funded they could join up and put on the uniform. Spouses are not the same as military members and have not done what military members have done, I don't care what the spouses club says.

They get medical benefits as well. We should probably get rid of those too.

Brett

 

[PropAddict]

^^^^ If I worked in corporate America, I would be able to opt my dependents in on my insurance plan there, and pay a monthly premium for them, just as I do now with Tricare. I would not, however, be able to send my wife to college on Lockmart/Pratt/Boeing's nickel. The two benefits are not analogous.


The economy "got a bit drunk". Uncle Sam has to tighten his belt, and entitlements are the first to go.

 

[m26]

I wasn't aware my tax dollars were going to fund a military spouses education. Perhaps, if they want thier education funded they could join up and put on the uniform. Spouses are not the same as military members and have not done what military members have done, I don't care what the spouses club says.

Okay, or maybe it's another benefit of military service. It may be indirect, but if you don't think Ensign Smith benefits when Mrs. Smith can have a portable career you're nuts.

 

[Brett327]

The two benefits are not analogous.

They're not identical, but they are analogous. Don't be a brick.

Brett

 

[S.O.B.]

I think the real issue is that the cancelation effects folks that are currently enrolled in programs and counting on the money. Could this happen to pensions, disability, tri-care, etc?

 

[navy09]

Okay, or maybe it's another benefit of military service. It may be indirect, but if you don't think Ensign Smith benefits when Mrs. Smith can have a portable career you're nuts.

You're absolutely right, this program is clearly an incentive to keep servicemembers in. I think that if you want to put money towards retention, give it to people in uniform.

There are single sailors who are unable to take advantage of this program (and aren't entitled to this $$$) simply because they have chosen not to get married.