Mayor de Blasio Fully and Publicly in Support for Pension Buyback Equity for Some Veterans

Background to The Mayor's May 21 2015 Announcement

Readers of this blog recall that Mayor de Blasio expressed strong support for expanding military service credit to all wartime veterans in his letter last year (here). This would update NY's laws by placing the current Wartime Era (Gulf War Era) on equal footing with all past Wartime Eras (WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War) in terms of military service credit buybacks. He nevertheless condemned the 2014 Veterans Equality Act specifically because it included 'peacetime veterans' also.

The Mayor has again gone on the record in support of military service credit for some veterans - in this case he has appeared to narrow (!) his support from wartime veterans  to Afghanistan veterans.

Pending Legislation for Military Service Credit Buyback

Right now the Veterans Equality Act (S4124, A4313A) is again working its way thru Albany. This will apply to all veterans (including all Wartime Era Veterans [Afghanistan veterans are a small subset of this wartime era]). At the same time a weak and inadequate  Afghanistan-only  military service credit bill (S4546, A6453) is also working its way thru Albany (see here for my take on the flim-flam Afghan-only bill).


This is what de Blasio actually said in his press conference today (21 May 2015):

"We are right now asking the state government in Albany to create more fairness in terms of pension opportunities for those who served in Afghanistan. Those who served in previous wars were given opportunities to attach their wartime service to their pensions to give them a better pension situation. That is not yet true for those who served in Afghanistan. We want to fix that, and we certainly don’t think it’s fair that, you know, individuals who were in one conflict are treated differently than those in another. So we want to fix that in Albany." (See here)


This was the 21 May 2015 response of NYC's Veterans' Alliance:

"We learned this morning that Mayor de Blasio will simply announce that he is no longer opposed to the Veterans Equality Act. As you remember, last fall the Veterans Equality Act passed both the NY State Assembly and Senate, and–had it not been vetoed–it would have updated eligibility for NY State and NYC employees to “buy back” up to three years credited toward their pension at a reduced rate based on their years of military service. The existing law grants eligibility only to veterans who served in designated combat areas long prior to 2001, which has resulted in Iraq veterans being eligible, but Afghanistan veterans not being eligible—to name but one disparity. Last fall Mayor de Blasio lobbied Governor Cuomo to veto this broadly-supported and long-overdue bill because he thought it would cost too much.

The Mayor was wrong last fall—and it is important that he make right on his deplorable action against veterans in civil service." (See here)

My Comments:

1. I have a sneaking suspicion that the veterans alliance might be misinterpreting his words...they may not even know there is a half-baked veterans' measure (AKA 'Afghanistan-Only') being brewed up there in Albany.

Call the Mayor (contact info is here) and educate him on the need for the Veterans' Equality Act. The information you need to explain it to him is here.

 2.It becoming clear that the Afghanistan veterans will be given the option of purchasing military service credit in a law this year. All 4 (both Senate and both Assembly) bills agree on that AND Mayor de Blasio would never go out on a limb unless he knew it was a done deal. You will note his talking points were available the night before so this was a very carefully planned announcement within the context of a very carefully planned Memorial Day announcement.

The only question is what other groups of veterans (if any) will be included in the bill. No veteran would ever begrudge the Afghanistan combat veterans' delayed journey from excluded to included in regards to military service credit.

One source that I consider reliable tells me the legislators are working to find a law that would be acceptable to both the Senate and House. This may or may not mean other groups will move from excluded veteran to included veteran status in the normal horse-trading and compromising that is Albany.

Decisions on this must be made up in Albany within the next two weeks.

3.An obvious compromise between the Republican - ruled Senate's "All Veterans/Veterans Equality Act " and the Democrat-ruled Assembly's "Afghanistan Only" bills is a "Gulf War Era Bill".
     This compromise bill would include all veterans who served (including Afghanistan veterans) during the most recent official wartime era (Gulf War; 1990-Present) and at the same time align current practice with New York's tradition  of permitting only wartime veterans to purchase military service credit. This is already the case with the WW II Wartime Era, the Korean Wartime Era, and the Vietnam Wartime Era.
     Since New York grants additional credit on its civil service exams to wartime veterans only, a "Gulf War Era Bill" aligns perfectly with that current New York practice.
     Beyond the attributes of  tradition and logical consistency, a compromise "Wartime Era Bill"  would be cheaper than an "All Veterans Bill" and slightly more expensive than an "Afghanistan Only' bill.

4. Another suggested compromise  between the Republican - ruled Senate's "All Veterans/Veterans Equality Act " and the Democrat-ruled Assembly's "Afghanistan Only" bills is a bill for wartime ("Gulf War Era veterans and all who served honorably during  conflicts currently recognized in the Laws of 2000: Lebanon 6/1/83-12/1/87; Grenada10/23/83 -11-21-83; Panama12/20/89-1/31/90 (dates are already in current law). I wrote about this compromise here
 
5. Another suggested compromise  between the Republican - ruled Senate's "All Veterans/Veterans Equality Act " and the Democrat-ruled Assembly's "Afghanistan Only" bills has been to limit the VEA ('all vets) to all veterans age 50 or greater. Of course this will heavily impact law enforcement folks who may retire prior to this date. This would greatly reduce the cost while at the same time potentially being applicable to 'all vets' who work until age 50 (or more).
 
6. Of course, the Veterans' Equality Act is much preferable to any compromise but given the mayor, governor and Assembly's opposition a bill moving the greatest number of our veterans from the excluded to included ranks is far preferable to another veto for all.