The well-being of military families should not be an open-ended question subject to the whims or interpretations of whomever happens to be seated at the head of the Pentagon.
Congress to adopt the bipartisan Military Hunger Prevention Act’ in this year’s NDAA. An initial ‘full-bellied’ version of the bill passed the House in September. Ultimately, however, Congress chose a path that helps far too few military families—serving only a fraction of the thousands of hungry military families who would directly benefit under the original provision.
Therefore, one of the most worrying pieces of Congress’s ‘breadcrumbs’ compromise NDAA is that it directs the secretary of defense to use his or her discretion to waive the BAH as income for service members only in “high cost of living areas.” The risk of this discretionary approach was on display just this week, when the Pentagonnew metrics for assessing ‘high cost of living areas,’ stripping cost-of-living stipends for more than eight in ten enlisted service members.
The well-being of military families should not be an open-ended question subject to the whims or interpretations of whomever happens to be seated at the head of the Pentagon or open to questionable decisions about what geographic areas are deserving of additional assistance.