Military Life News

Military Life News, Commissary Rewards and Military Discounts

Homeland Security’s Request for DoD to House Detained Immigrants Sparks Online Debate

By

The possibility of detained immigrants living on military bases in the southwest has sparked wide and heated debate among the military community. The opinions range from military spouses offering to teach English to these temporary residents to ones suggesting that those entering illegally should be immediately returned to their countries of origin.

According to Department of Defense statements, DoD have been asked to provide up to 12,000 beds on military bases for detained immigrants.

“The Department of Defense has received a request for assistance from the Department of Homeland Security to house and care for an alien family population of up to 12,000 people. DHS requests that DoD identify any available facilities that could be used for that purpose,” the Pentagon said in a statement.

Homeland Security's Request for DoD to House Detained Immigrants Sparks Online Debate

Do you support this plan for DoD to house detained immigrants?

DoD is preparing to receive up to 2,000 immigrants before September 2018. Possible locations and housing arrangements are being scouted now by military leaders. Secretary of Defense James Mattis has identified Goodfellow Air Force Base in San Angelo and Fort Bliss in El Paso as locations available to house unaccompanied immigrant minors.

Possible additional locations in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California are also being considered.

Facebook Post Sparks Debate Among Military Spouses

Many military spouses commented on a Facebook post from Military Spouse magazine stating that military bases might soon be used to house detained immigrants. Approximately 70 comments were made on the original post. However, this Facebook post has been shared at least 18 times from that first post alone.

One military spouse referenced the words on the Statue of Liberty, from the poem “The New Colossus” by Emma Lazarus.

“Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Many Facebook comments made by military spouses shared a similar mentality.

Several commenters shared specific ways that they would be willing to help, from housing immigrants personally to providing respite child care for immigrant parents or teaching ESL in the temporary housing facilities.

Counter-arguments suggested that people considering immigrating to the United States to stay in their own countries. Some stated that those seeking asylum should not cross U.S. borders without proper authorization and paperwork.

According to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services department, those seeking asylum must be physically present in the United States at the time of their application. In order to be considered for humanitarian asylum, applicants need to cross over a U.S. border or arrive at a port of entry.

Commenters also suggested that those entering “illegally” or seeking asylum should be immediately returned to their countries of origin.

Will Housing Detained Immigrants on Military Bases Impact Military Families?

Lots of individuals were upset over the possible impacts on military base housing or on-base child care centers.

No mention of placing detained immigrants in military family housing or allowing access to CDCs has been mentioned. Multiple sources state that immigrants will be housed in temporary facilities. Costs incurred by the DoD for providing temporary housing would be reimbursed.

Other comments included references to housing issues faced by veterans and their families, as well as by other Americans facing hard times. Some Facebook commenters suggested that instead of placing immigrants into the temporary shelters, that they instead be used for homeless Americans.

Several individuals raised concerns about security and potential issues. They pointed out that many military facilities are closed, and require a DoD ID card to enter or for non-DoD civilians to be escorted.

They are concerned that immigrants may be accidentally able to pick up confidential information and disseminate it to possible threats to the base or the U.S. military.

All indications from previous reports are that detained immigrants would be housed in temporary shelters separate from military facilities and family housing.

Many commenting threads became heated and insults were exchanged from individuals on both sides of the issue.

Dozens of commenters reflected that, based on some comments, they were disappointed with the reaction in the military spouse community.

Others found hope in the empathy of their peers.

Many found kindred spirits who agreed on common points of view.

Susie Schwartz, the wife of retired Air Force General Norton Schwartz and a vice president at Military Spouse magazine’s publisher Victory Media, chimed in with a call for kindness.

“I hope we can all show compassion for each other,” Schwartz wrote in her Facebook comment. “Within our own community and with others.”

Do you support this plan to house detained immigrants on military bases or are you against it? Tell us in the comments section.

Military Families Living On-Base Worry About the Safety of Their Drinking Water

By

Military families may need to add drinking water to their growing list of lifestyle-related worries and concerns. A recent report from the Department of Defense confirms that potentially hazardous chemicals are in the tap water at many military installations.

Military Families Living On-Base Worry About the Safety of Their Drinking Water

A total of 126 military installations have polluted water that could cause health problems. Are you worried about drinking the tap water at your on-base house?

These recent reports have left a stain on the current White House and Department of Defense because it looks like a cover-up might have happened.

Don’t Drink the Water at Your Military Base

Before military families go into full-on panic mode, it’s important that we know exactly what we’re dealing with or at least understand as much as we can with the information currently available.

What is the issue with the drinking water?

Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) are two chemicals commonly found in everyday objects. You can find PFOS/PFOA in everything from Teflon coating to waterproofing on fabric to fast food wrappers. It was phased out of use by American manufacturers starting in May 2000.

Why are PFOS/PFOA a concern?

According to the DoD report and additional reporting by news outlets, PFOS/PFOA exposure can be harmless in small amounts. However, repeated and long-term exposure comes with a host of health complications.

Both men and women can experience impacts on fertility. Babies may be born with developmental delays. Those exposed may experience increased cholesterol levels, increased uric acid and changes in liver enzymes. There may also be changes to the immune system too.

Finally, exposure to PFOS/PFOA may have an increased risk of prostate, kidney and testicular cancers.

As of August 2017, 401 current and former military installations have had their water tested. Of those, 90 have water samples that exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s Lifetime Health Advisory (LHA) levels.

Additionally, 2,668 groundwater sources have been tested. Of those, 1,621 have PFOS/PFOA levels above the EPA’s LHA. All told, 1,711 sites have compromised water sources.

Reports also indicate that a total of 126 military installations have polluted water that could cause health problems.

The DoD’s response at this time, according to their published report, is to educate the services, investigate the use of products containing PFOS/PFOA and begin planning for cleanup operations.

Since the water was tested in 2017, why wasn’t the water contamination report released earlier?

The PFOS/PFOA report is enough to cause public concern. However, it now appears that the White House and DoD officials might have prevented the immediate release of information.

Through emails obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists, officials at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) warned the EPA of a “public relations nightmare” when the PFOS/PFOA report was released. These emails are dated January 2018.

Reports on the water contamination were released in spring 2018.

What can military families do?

If you are living on or near an impacted installation or groundwater source, it might be time to consider changing how you drink water.

Adding a water filtration system, according to a 2016 report on Water Online, can have some impact on the levels of PFOS and PFOA in your tap water supply. However, no single system has been shown to be totally effective for both categories or related chemicals. Granular activated carbon has been shown to be the most effective filtration system, along with nanofiltration and reverse osmosis.

Another option is to switch to bottled water. The Food and Drug Administration monitors bottled water manufacturers to ensures compliance with health and safety standards.

Military families should also document health concerns that might be related to PFOS/PFOA contamination. Correlating your family’s physical location with health problems that might stem from exposure to chemical contaminants is important for long-term care and solutions.

Military communities have already banded together to provide documentation of military-caused health issues due to contaminated drinking water. Current and former residents of Camp Lejeune scored a victory in this arena.

Are you stationed at a military base with unsafe drinking water? What precautions are you taking to protect your loved ones from the threat of unsafe water?

Trump Releases Transgender Troop Policy

By

President Donald Trump recently released his policy directive regarding the continuing service of transgender troops in the U.S. military.

Under recommendations from Secretary of Defense James Mattis, the Trump administration has ruled that transgender individuals are generally disqualified from military service except under certain circumstances.

Transgender Troops Are Out Under New Policy

Mattis outlined the new policy recommendations in a February 22 memo. Transgender individuals are disqualified from military service unless they have not been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Troops must also be willing to serve in their biological gender. Changing gender identity is no longer allowed under most circumstances.

Troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria or with a history of this diagnosis are generally barred from military service. However, they may serve if they have been deemed stable for 36 consecutive months in their biological gender prior to joining the military.

Transgender troops may also remain in uniform if they were diagnosed after joining, but remain in their biological gender and maintain deployability status in that gender.

If a service member was diagnosed between the Obama administration’s policy change in July 2016 and the adoption of this new policy, they may continue to serve and receive medical treatment for their diagnosis. This small subset of transgender troops may continue to serve in their preferred gender.

Trump Releases Transgender Troop Policy

The reaction to Trump’s policy on transgender troops is split along party lines.

Mattis based his changes on a new transgender policy study conducted by Department of Defense officials and military leaders. This study generally contradicts the findings of a 2016 Rand Corporation study. The earlier study indicated that there would be minimal impact on military readiness and morale caused by the service of transgender troops in their preferred gender identity. The new study found that allowing troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria to serve or join the military would be detrimental to military readiness and morale.

“(T)he Department concludes that accommodating gender transition could impair unit readiness; undermine unit cohesion, as well as good order and discipline, by blurring the clear lines that demarcate male and female standards and policies where they exist; and lead to disproportionate costs,” the DoD report reads in part.

Transgender Policy Changes Were Rapidly Reversed

Under the former President Barack Obama and former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, transgender individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria were allowed to transition to their preferred gender identity. This policy was implemented in stages. As of July 1, 2016, currently serving transgender troops were allowed to openly serve without fear of discharge based on their gender identity. The final policy change of allowing transgender individuals to join the military in their preferred gender was set to roll out on July 1, 2017.

However, after a series of tweets from Trump in July 2017 and with coordinating action from Mattis, this policy was halted for a 6-month review process. This review led to the creation of the current administration’s policy on the military service of transgender troops.

Based on the Rand study, between 1,300 and 7,000 transgender troops are currently serving in the U.S. military. Per the new policy, only those troops willing to serve in their biological gender and who have not been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, except under specific circumstances, will no longer be allowed to serve or join.

Trump’s Ban Faces Legal Battles and Mixed Public Reaction

Trump’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the Armed Forces is already facing legal pushback. The Human Rights Campaign and Washington State are moving ahead with their federal lawsuit against the ban. They are joined by legal challenges in California. These legal battles continue earlier challenges that lifted the block on transgender individuals enlisting earlier in 2018. Based on these legal battles, Pentagon spokesperson Army Maj. David Eastburn noted that these policy changes would have little impact immediately.

Reaction to the change in policy has been generally split along party lines.

The Family Research Council, a conservative think tank, praised Trump’s decision in a series of tweets.

Congressman Ted Lieu wrote, in an opinion piece for Fortune magazine, that he believed these policy changes to be “stupid” and “unconstitutional.” Lieu is a veteran.

Troops and their families impacted by this decision are disturbed by these policy changes.

“The Trump administration’s continued insistence on targeting our families for discrimination is appalling, reckless and unpatriotic,” said Ashley Broadway-Mack, president of the American Military Partners Association and spouse of an active duty Army officer.

What do you think of Trump’s policy on transgender service members?

How POTUS’ Food Stamp Plan Will Impact Military Families

By

When you consider that the United States is one of the world’s wealthiest counties, it is disheartening to hear that 1 in 6 Americans don’t have enough food to eat. Many of those struggling with hunger are children and many are part of military families.

POTUS' Food Stamp Plan Will Impact Military Families

Do you use food stamps or have you in the past?

In a 2015 report, an estimated $80 million dollars’ worth of food was purchased in military commissaries using the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP). This number doesn’t include military families who use other programs like Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) or who don’t shop at the commissary.

So proposed changes to the SNAP program will have a profound impact on military families.

As part of the 2019 budget request, the Trump administration has proposed a dramatic change to the food stamp program. The proposed change includes a reduction in “cash” benefits by half for anyone receiving $90 or more per month. Instead, SNAP cash benefits will be supplemented with a “Blue Apron-type” box filled with shelf-stable foods like canned fruits and vegetables, peanut butter, cereals, pasta, butter and beans. These boxes, called “America’s Harvest Boxes,” will supposedly save over $129 million dollars over the course of the next 10 years.

The fact that there are military families in need of assistance is an issue for another day, but let’s discuss these food boxes.

It’s an Interesting Idea

There is a part of me that thinks that these boxes could work. I mean, buying in bulk almost always drives down the cost. If the government is using its buying power to get great pricing on products, then I can see the merit. Especially, if that buying power is being used to buy all of the things that are often out of reach, like fresh fruits and vegetables, or gluten-free or organic items.

Except, that these boxes won’t include those items.

Staples like peanut butter, pasta, even canned fruits and vegetables aren’t inherently bad, but the best nutrients and the healthiest of diets, don’t often include many things out of a can.

What about those families who have a child allergic to peanut butter? Or who need gluten-free pasta? Or who need their food to be kosher? What if a family buys from a food bank program or farming cooperative and can actually stretch their SNAP funds further than the box provides?

The argument can be made that beggars can’t be choosers, but the families on SNAP and WIC aren’t exactly beggars. They are often young families or those impacted by loss of employment.

Shouldn’t families be allowed to select the food they know their family will eat?

Should they be forced to eat what the government says they should?

I find this incredibly ironic, considering how adamant this same administration has been in dismantling the school lunch program put in place by the previous administration that was designed to get kids to eat a government mandated balanced meal.

What About Distribution?

If you read through the proposed box system, you’ll notice the distribution of these boxes has been left to the states to figure out. They can “distribute these boxes through existing infrastructure, partnerships, and/or directly to residences through commercial and/or retail delivery services.”

Really?

Current food stamp infrastructure most often includes direct deposit of money to a SNAP food card, which can be used like a debit card to pay for groceries. Kind of hard to “distribute” boxes in that same way. And I find it hard to believe that door-to-door delivery is a) efficient and b) actually going to save money.

Instead, it will likely require recipients to travel to a distribution center. Taking hours away from the work day and potentially adding the cost of transportation to an already tight federal budget.

Better Options

Call me an optimist, but I think if we really wanted to conquer hunger, there are better ways to do it. Some states have started edible food forests to help produce food for needy families. Some cities are seeing a growth in urban farming, cutting down on distribution time and costs, and there are plenty of non-profit farms working to add fresh fruits and vegetables to the diets of our poorest Americans.

I’d much rather see our government working to support these ideas instead of boxing up cans of corn and jars of peanut butter.

For our military families, this is yet another reason why we have to keep our commissaries open. How many more military families will find themselves simply unable to buy the things they need if the savings offered on base are taken away?

Do you use food stamps or have you in the past? What do you think of the proposed changes to food stamps?

The Debate Surrounding Transgender Troops Serving in the U.S. Military

By

Beginning last summer, the U.S. military community has been debating whether transgender troops are fit to serve. President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense James Mattis, along with many military leaders, seem to be at odds over a policy relating to transgender troops.

The Debate Surrounding Transgender Troops Serving in the U.S. Military

The White House is anticipated to release its final verdict and policy on transgender troops this month.

Final Policy Pending

Mattis was under a February 21, 2018, deadline to return his recommendations to the president. According to The Washington Post, it is anticipated that Mattis will support transgender troops currently serving, as well as those wishing to join in the future. Mattis made his official recommendation regarding Trump’s proposed transgender military policy on February 23, 2018. The Pentagon has not confirmed or commented on Mattis’ final recommendation.

As of January 1, 2018, individuals identifying as transgender are free to enlist or seek a commission in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Mattis’ likely position could be supported by a 2016 Rand Corporation study that was commissioned by the Obama administration. Former President Barack Obama and his administration had removed the ban on transgender troops who serve openly in June 2016.

This study found that less than 1% of active duty troops identify as transgender.

Approximately, between 1,320 and 6,630 active duty troops identify as transgender. Additionally, the study found that total medical costs related directly to transgender-specific medical care would be negligible, amounting to less than $10 million annually. This is a “relatively small” amount in the military budget. It represents a 0.04% to 0.13% increase in the overall active duty health care expenses.

Finally, not all transgender troops would elect to transition medically, with surgery. The study concluded that between 29 and 129 service members would experience a disruption to deployment readiness as a result of transgender-specific medical care.

Currently 1.3 million troops are on active duty.

Trump Tweets New Transgender Policy

On July 26, 2017, Trump tweeted his desire to reinstate a ban on transgender troops. He cited the increased cost of medical care for transgender troops as well as the disruption of military service. His announcement, which claimed that he had consulted with top military brass, seemed to catch Mattis and other military leaders off-guard. At the time of the tweets, Mattis made no immediate official comment.

Days later, military leaders appeared to walk back Trump’s sweeping policy change. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Joseph Dunford made clear that transgender personnel would continue to serve until Mattis received clear direction from Trump. Then, that direction would need to be implemented over time. This decision was supported by Mattis.

According to recently released emails, Dunford communicated to the other service chiefs that he was “not consulted.” Dunford appeared willing to confirm this to the media and wrote that this policy change “was unexpected.”

Ban Blocked in Court

On October 30, 2017, the U.S. district court in Washington, D.C., issued an injunction in favor of 8 transgender individuals who were in ROTC programs or enrolled at service academies. The D.C. court’s decision was backed by the Maryland district court in a November 12, 2017, ruling. The Maryland judge also issued an impending injunction that blocked Trump’s proposed ban to take effect due to constitutional violations of the plaintiffs. Both cases are still pending a final ruling.

The initial rulings from Maryland and D.C. allowed these individuals to continue to take steps toward active duty service. The injunctions also swayed the Pentagon to allow transgender individuals to enlist starting on January 1, 2018.

Trump directed Mattis, per an August 25, 2017, executive order, to review the current policy as well as his proposed policy. His recommendations were due back to the White House on February 21, 2018.

The White House is anticipated to release its final verdict and policy statement on March 23, 2018.

Questions Remain for Transgender Troops

In the middle of all of this political discussion, are the openly transgender troops currently serving. Their continued service is potentially at risk. In addition, as of January 1, 2018, openly transgender individuals are allowed to join active military service.

Trump’s March 23 decision could have immediate ramifications for troops currently serving, as well as those who are beginning their initial processing and training. Troops who are currently serving may be forced to resign without benefits. However, the actual proposed policy regarding current transgender service members remains unclear.

What do you think? Should transgender service members be allowed to serve openly in the U.S. military?

What the New GI Bill Means for Military Families

By

Brace yourselves. Changes are coming to the GI Bill as we know it.

President Donald Trump signed the Forever GI Bill into law in August 2017. With this new bill, changes are in the works, including transferring benefits, housing allowances and the deadline to access GI Bill funds.

What the New GI Bill Means for Military Families

Time Limit

Under the Post-9/11 GI Bill, beneficiaries had 15 years to use their earned education benefits. With the new GI Bill, there is no time limit to complete a degree, license or education program.

This is arguably the most important change to the bill since it extends the time that beneficiaries have to complete their education.

It allows for unexpected life events or changes along the way.

This is limited to veterans, troops and designated dependents who became eligible on or after January 1, 2013.

Housing Allowance

Under the current GI Bill, non-active duty students rate the Overseas Housing Allowance (OHA) for an E-5 with dependents based on the location of their school. Additionally, students receive a portion of the total allowance based on how many credits they are taking. In order to qualify, students must be enrolled at greater than half-time.

Starting Jan. 1, 2018, the housing allowance will be calculated using the reduced BAH schedule.

Previously, the GI Bill has been exempted from the yearly 1% BAH reduction started in 2015 and ending in 2020. Students using the GI Bill before January 1, 2018, will continue to receive their current housing allowance rates.

Additionally, the location used to calculate housing allowances will be tied to the location where students physically attend classes. This could impact students who attend a satellite campus in a location with a lower BAH rate. This change goes into effect on Aug. 1, 2018. Students enrolled before this date will follow the current rules.

Housing for members of the reserve will be prorated by quarter, semester or term starting on Aug. 1, 2018.

Expanded Access

Currently, eligibility for GI Bill benefits is calculated based on time in service or discharge due to service-related injury. Under the Forever GI Bill, all Purple Heart recipients will be rated at the 100% funding level or with 100% of their tuition and fees of in-state tuition paid for.

Additionally, certain members of the Reserve will be eligible for benefits under certain conditions. If Reserve troops deployed to support a combatant command or within their state in response to a natural disaster, they may now be able to access GI Bill benefits. This includes Reservists who deployed in these capacities after 2009.

Reservists who used the Reserve Education Assistance Program (REAP) will now be able to access the GI Bill under certain circumstances. Students who qualified before Nov. 25, 2015, but whose benefits have expired may choose to have that time in service credited toward the Post-9/11 GI Bill. This change applies to coursework started after Aug. 1, 2018.

Previously, students could be considered eligible for 40% of total GI Bill benefits (40% of in-state public college tuition and fees paid for) based on time in service. This category has now been eliminated.

Instead, the 60% level has been expanded to include more veterans. The minimum benefits level is now set at 50%, meaning that up to 50% of tuition and fees at an in-state public college would be paid by the VA.

Overall, more veterans and designated beneficiaries will be able to access higher education or career training with increased funding possible.

Transferring Benefits

Veterans can designate a dependent to receive GI Bill benefits. In the past, if that person passed away, the benefits disappeared.

Now, veterans are able to select another eligible dependent should their original designee die. Dependents who have received benefits are also able to pass on the GI Bill to another designee. This is only able to happen after the veteran who earned the benefits has passed away.

This now allows GI Bill benefits to continue on beyond the veteran or original designee in the event of death. This could prevent these valuable benefits from going unused.

Extra Protection

If your college closes before you earn a degree, the GI Bill now offers protections. Time spent at a college that has closed can now be partially or fully reinstated.

Students can also potentially earn GI Bill time back for courses that were not approved or for courses in which no credit was earned.

This is retroactive to programs, courses and colleges that were discontinued after Aug. 1, 2015. The change takes effect 90 days after the bill was signed.

Programs and Licenses

Students may begin using their benefits at accredited area career and technical schools that provide post-secondary education and/or vocational skills. This allows students to pursue a career path outside of traditional college level education.

Veterans at the 100% benefits level, with at least 60 credit hours of work and who will be reaching the end of their benefits before they complete an eligible degree in science, math, engineering, medicine or certain teacher training programs can apply for an extension.

This is a one-time 9-month benefit bonus. It cannot be transferred or be used in conjunction with the Yellow Ribbon Program. There is a $30,000 cap. This change begins on Aug. 1, 2019.

Entitlement charges for professional licensing and certification exams will be prorated based on the actual amount charged for the test.

Additional Benefits

Spouses and dependents who qualify for the Fry Scholarship may now also access the Yellow Ribbon Scholarship as well. This opens up new funding possibilities to supplement the GI Bill at private colleges or out-of-state schools. Purple Heart recipients will also be qualified for Yellow Ribbon Scholarships. These changes take effect on Aug. 1, 2018.

Beginning on Aug. 1, 2022, active duty troops using the GI Bill will be able to access the Yellow Ribbon Program. This will expand their ability to complete coursework at a larger number of institutes of higher learning while still serving their country.

Students who were eligible under the Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance program now have 36 months of benefits instead of 45 months. This change applies to students who enroll after Aug. 1, 2018.

This same change increases the amount payable per month to $1,224 for full-time students, $967 for students enrolled at three-quarter time and $710 for half time enrollment. This increase is effective Oct. 1, 2018.

Will these changes to the GI Bill impact your family? Share your thoughts in the comments.