THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, August 8, 1994 TAG: 9408080048
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY JOHN DIAMOND, ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium: 85 lines
The Clinton administration is embroiled in a debate over whether the government should invest nearly $30 billion in military pay raises in the next five years.
On one side is Defense Secretary William J. Perry, who not only wants the raise for purposes of morale and military readiness but insists that the extra cost should not come from other portions of the Pentagon budget.
Arrayed against Perry are White House staffers and budget officials who view the proposal as a raid on President Clinton's cherished domestic priorities.
Accepting Perry's proposal threatens Clinton's agenda of deficit reduction but offers the president an opportunity to shore up his reputation with the military. Rejecting the pay raise eases a major budget headache for Clinton but could lead to a widening pay gap between the military and the private sector. An already difficult recruiting situation, aggravated by reports of soldiers on food stamps, could worsen.
``It is the single biggest-dollar issue we're going to face,'' an administration official said.
Under Perry's plan, military and civilian Defense Department employees would get a raise pegged to the increase in the cost of living in each of the next five years. The proposal comes after two years in which Clinton proposed no raise or a raise below the cost-of-living increase, only to see Congress approve the full pay increases for the military.
``This is the dilemma,'' said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. ``Since Congress is putting the raise in anyway, instead of getting a black eye from the military he ought to just put the pay raise in.''
But unless Clinton slashes other Pentagon programs or takes money from some domestic program, the military pay raise could make it difficult for him to submit a budget below previously established spending caps.
Among White House national security advisers and budget planners, the debate is intensifying as planning proceeds on the administration's fiscal 1996 budget proposal to be submitted in January. One budget planner said Clinton could decide the question for fiscal 1996 as early as this week. But as yet, according to one White House official, ``The current budget policy on the pay raise has not changed.''
Perry argues his case on military grounds. Pay, he says, relates directly to the military's readiness for battle in terms of the quality of recruits, the duration of enlistments, and morale. The Pentagon was embarrassed by recent reports of troops relying on food stamps to feed their families and estimates that as many as 16,000 enlistees may be using the stamps to supplement their food budgets.
Perry said that he has not yet raised the issue with Clinton. But he noted that when Congress made it clear it wanted full cost-of-living raises for the military last year, Clinton allowed him to add $11.4 billion to the defense budget to pay for those higher levels. ILLUSTRATION: Color graphic
ABOUT PAY RAISES
THIS YEAR:
President Clinton's fiscal 1995 budget proposed a 1.6 percent pay
raise. Both the House and Senate rejected that plan and approved a
2.6 percent military pay raise.
HOW MUCH:
A typical Army sergeant at the E-5 pay scale making $16,800 per
year would get an additional $436; the raise proposed by Clinton
would have been $268.
A typical colonel with 24 years of service making $66,432 would
get $1,727; the raise proposed by Clinton would have been $1063.
WHO IS COVERED
About 1.5 million uniformed military
About 900,000 civilians on the Department of Defense payroll.
Defense Secretary William j. Perry's proposed pay raise would be
compounded annually over five years.
KEYWORDS: MILITARY PAY MILITARY SALARIES
MILITARY BUDGET DEFENSE BUDGET
by CNB