I have over 40 years of experience working on Department of Defense (DoD) budgets, so it's safe to say I understand them pretty well. However, I do not understand the recent congressionally proposed change in the military benefit Basic Allowance for Housing, or BAH. This is a housing allowance based on geographic duty location, pay grade, and dependency status. It provides uniformed service members equitable housing compensation based on housing costs in local civilian housing markets.
This proposal would penalize dual-military married couples by eliminating the housing stipend to one of the dual-married members.
As a comparison, let's say a married couple works for a company. They work in different sections of the company and are paid based on their individual jobs and performance. Then one day, as a cost-savings measure, the company decides that since the married couple live in the same house, they don't need to be paid as much as their peers whose spouses either don't work or work in a different company. I suspect that would be viewed as preposterous. Doing the same for military married couples is equally preposterous.
It gets worse. Let's say two single service members share an apartment to save money, which is not uncommon in high-cost areas. Currently, both are entitled to single rate BAH. This proposal would take the sum of both of their BAH amounts and cut their entitlement in half.
Now, let's talk numbers. If enacted, this change would affect 40,000 military couples. Since 67 percent of dual-military couples are enlisted, this proposal disproportionately affects those that can least afford it.
I retired from the Air Force as a four-star, but I started out as an E-1. I can tell you first hand that a reduction like this would have played havoc on my family budget.
More than 20 percent of women on active duty are in dual-military marriages. In fact, analysis shows that in most cases women hold the lesser rank in dual-military marriages, so this proposal also disproportionately affects military women.
Cutting spending to reduce the federal debt is logical and reasonable. Increasing the burden on military families, who already sacrifice daily in service to our country, is neither reasonable nor logical. No reasonable person could conclude that this proposal will make a dent in the federal debt. Our military families deserve better.
We have, hands down, the most educated, best trained and capable Airmen in the history of our Air Force. Airmen are performing global strike missions against ISIS, humanitarian airlift and sovereignty alert missions, operating the nation's space, cyberspace, and missile defense forces, and providing critical national intelligence support.
Nearly 40,000 of America's Airmen are currently deployed to 263 locations across the globe, including 63 locations in the Middle East, and another 130,000 Airmen support the missions of our U.S. geographic combatant commands from their home duty stations.
Are there portions of the DoD budget that could use some trimming? Yes. Is BAH one of them? No.
Gen. Larry O. Spencer (retired) is the president of the Air Force Association. He retired from the Air Force as the vice chief of staff after 40 years in the service.
