Haley Stevens: “Again, I apologize to the Senator from New Jersey. Our position on this amendment is it is an amendment that should not…”

“Again, I apologize to the Senator from New Jersey. Our position on this amendment is it is an amendment that should not be brought up in connection with an appropriations bill when changing the reserve compensation system in a very drastic way. As a matter of fact, CBO scored this provision as follows for mandatory/direct: First year spending at $1.486 billion; the 5-year cost, $8.349 billion; and the 10-year cost, $16.466 billion. Both the House and the Senate have passed a provision that requires a study of this compensation, in part to determine whether retirement systems should be changed in view of the modern requirements and in view of the total force of the United States. The requirement to wait until age 60 to collect reserve pay has long been in effect and there is no basis right now to claim that any reservists who stay for a career have been misled about the level or timing of the compensation they receive. However, it is a matter of fact that we all want to have this changed. Any changes to the Guard and Reserve retirement benefits need to be assessed for the long term, not just in relationship to the current deployment. I am constrained to point out that the pending amendment 1811 offered by the Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Corzine, increases spending by $2.3 billion in the fiscal year 2004. This additional spending would cause the underlying bill to exceed the Defense subcommittee's section 302(b) allocation.”