The Pentagon Plans to Cut Overseas Service Members’ Allowances While Subsidizing Abortion Travel
The Pentagon is reportedly planning to cut overseas service members’ cost-of-living allowances next month, even as it continues to subsidize travel for its employees to get abortions.
According to Military.com, the Defense Department announced in May that service members stationed overseas, including troops in Alaska and Hawaii, would see cuts to their cost-of-living allowance. While the first cut in allowances occurred on May 15, the second is slated to happen on Nov. 15 and will be reflected in service members’ Dec. 1 paychecks. More than 230,000 military members receive these payments, according to the outlet.
The purpose of overseas cost-of-living allowances, or OCOLA, is to help service members stationed in remote locations offset costs of basic necessities that are typically more expensive due to their base’s distance from the contiguous United States. Increased inflation and changing currency rates, however, have supposedly resulted in “the gap … diminishing, leading to the cuts.”
“OCOLA is based on a service member’s spendable income and does not consider money a spouse earns,” Military.com explained. “It’s calculated by comparing the price of goods and services overseas with the average cost for equivalent products in the States, which creates an index for the cost-of-living allowance. Service members receive an increase only if costs are higher overseas compared to prices stateside.”
Unnamed senior defense officials tried to justify the cuts, claiming in May that an “across-the-board” pay raise for service members this year will result in a “higher take-home pay even with OCOLA reductions than what they had in 2022.”
While the Pentagon seemingly can’t find enough funds to support service members in acquiring basic needs, it’s been more than willing to spend countless U.S. taxpayer dollars for its female employees to get abortions.
In February, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced that the agency would financially cover abortion-related travel expenses for service members and their dependents. This prompted Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville to launch a protest of the policy the following month. Using his position on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Tuberville has been slow-walking military promotions requiring Senate confirmation.
To be clear, Tuberville is not blocking votes, but is forcing the Armed Services Committee to vote on each nomination individually rather than voting “en masse on large numbers of nominations.”
The Alabama Republican has since come under a barrage of attacks from Austin, top-ranking military officials, and Democrats (I repeat myself), who have baselessly claimed Tuberville’s protest is harming U.S. “military readiness” and “national security.” Former CIA Director Michael Hayden — a Trump-Russia collusion hoaxer who joined more than 50 former intelligence officials in signing a letter claiming Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation — took his unhinged criticisms a step further by apparently calling for Tuberville’s assassination.
Despite Democrats’ hysteria, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer tacitly admitted he had the power to bring military promotions to the Senate floor the entire time last month after he filed cloture on several Biden nominees. Meanwhile, Tuberville has since doubled down, reaffirming in a Tuesday tweet that he’ll continue his protest until the Pentagon lifts its abortion policy.
“To be clear, I don’t care if Senate Republicans break with me or not. I’m not dropping my holds until the policy is revoked,” Tuberville wrote. “The DOD should be worried about defending our nation instead of forcing the taxpayers to fund elective abortions.”
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
How does the Pentagon’s decision to cut overseas service members’ allowances affect their financial well-being and ability to afford necessary resources while serving in challenging environments
As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Tuberville sent a letter to Austin expressing his concerns about the Pentagon using taxpayer funds to subsidize abortion travel, while simultaneously cutting the cost-of-living allowances for overseas service members. Tuberville argued that this decision was unfair to the brave men and women who sacrifice so much for their country.
The issue of abortion is a highly debated and controversial topic in the United States, with passionate arguments on both sides. However, it is important to note that the Pentagon’s decision to subsidize abortion travel goes against the values and beliefs of a significant portion of the American population, who believe in the sanctity of life and oppose the use of taxpayer funds for such purposes.
Furthermore, the decision to cut overseas service members’ allowances raises questions about the priorities of the Pentagon. It seems contradictory to reduce financial support for those stationed in remote and often expensive locations, while simultaneously allocating funds for abortion travel. This decision not only puts a financial burden on service members serving overseas but also fails to recognize the unique challenges they face in these locations.
Service members stationed overseas often have limited access to necessary resources and face higher costs for basic necessities compared to their counterparts in the United States. The cost-of-living allowance was intended to address these disparities and ensure that service members can afford the essentials while serving their country abroad. By cutting this allowance, the Pentagon is undermining the well-being and financial security of those who have chosen to serve their country in challenging environments.
It is essential for the Pentagon to reassess its priorities and allocate resources in a manner that reflects the needs and values of its service members. While it is understandable that budget constraints may require some difficult decisions, it is crucial to ensure that the welfare of service members remains a top priority. Providing financial support for abortion travel while cutting overseas service members’ allowances sends a troubling message about the Pentagon’s commitment to those who serve.
In conclusion, the Pentagon’s decision to cut overseas service members’ allowances while continuing to subsidize abortion travel is highly concerning and raises questions about its priorities. It is crucial for the Pentagon to reconsider these policies and ensure that the welfare of service members is adequately supported. Allocating resources in a fair and responsible manner is not only necessary to maintain the morale and well-being of our military personnel, but it also reflects the values and beliefs of the American people.
