After the disappointing November 2014 override-proof veto of The Veterans' Equality Act/Veterans' Buyback Bill and again after the equally disappointing November 2015 override-proof veto for the identical legislation, smarter proposed reforms to the current buyback program are in order. The most offensive defects of the inadequate Laws of 2000 are cured with a buyback option for:
1. All who served honorably during a Federal Wartime Era. :
Would look like this in the Law of 2000 (Bold is Added Text):
1. A member, upon application to such retirement system, may obtain a
4 total not to exceed three years of service credit for up to three years
5 of military duty, as defined in section two hundred forty-three of the
6 military law, if the member was honorably discharged from the military
7 and all or part of such military service was rendered during the
8 following periods: (a) commencing December seventh, nineteen hundred
9 forty-one and terminating December thirty-first, nineteen hundred
10 forty-six; (b) commencing June twenty-seventh, nineteen hundred fifty
11 and terminating January thirty-first, nineteen hundred fifty-five; or
12 (c) commencing February twenty-eighth, nineteen hundred sixty-one and
13 terminating May seventh, nineteen hundred seventy-five; or (d) commencing August second, nineteen hundred ninety and terminating upon the cessation of hostilities
and (text to be omitted)
Note 1: As illustrated, this would align the current Gulf War Era with NY's past and present practice on the WW II, Korea, and Vietnam War Eras.
Note 2: Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo and Somalia hostilities fall within this current federal wartime period
Note 3: Servicewomen during this federal Gulf War Era were essentially excluded from the combat zone or forbidden from certain combat assignments (infantry, armor, etc.). This reform fixes the effect of that discrimination. All combat and assignment restrictions on women will be lifted on January 1, 2016 (here).
2. 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).
Would look like this in the Law of 2000:
2. A member, upon application to such retirement system, may obtain a
15 total not to exceed three years of service credit for up to three years
16 of military duty, as defined in section two hundred forty-three of the
17 military law, if honorably discharged therefrom, if all or part of such
18 services was rendered
19 follows:
20 (a) hostilities participated in by the military forces of the United
21 States in Lebanon, from the first day of June, nineteen hundred eighty-
22 three to the first day of December, nineteen hundred eighty-seven,
23 established by receipt of the armed forces expeditionary medal, the navy
24 expeditionary medal, or the marine corps expeditionary medal;
25 (b) hostilities participated in by the military forces of the United
26 States in Grenada, from the twenty-third day of October, nineteen
27 hundred eighty-three to the twenty-first day of November, nineteen
28 hundred eighty-three,
29 expeditionary medal, the navy expeditionary medal, or the marine corps
30 expeditionary medal;
31 (c) hostilities participated in by the military forces of the United
32 States in Panama, from the twentieth day of December, nineteen hundred
33 eighty-nine to the thirty-first day of January, nineteen hundred ninety,
34
35 navy expeditionary medal, or the marine corps expeditionary medal; or
Note: Servicewomen at this time were essentially excluded from the combat zone or forbidden from certain combat assignments (infantry, armor, etc.). This reform fixes the effect of that discrimination. All combat and assignment restrictions on women will be lifted on January 1, 2016 (here).
3. Veterans whose entire service was outside of these recognized wartime and conflict periods may purchase up to three years 'at full cost'.
Note: The 'full cost' language from the Chapter of Chapter 644 of the Laws of 1998 would apply. This means that there would be no cost to the state or municipality and veterans would pay 100% of the incurred benefit as a purchase price.
Keeping in mind that we must learn from the level of public and veterans' groups support for the bills (2014 and 2015) as well as the double override-proof veto (2014 and 2015) from the governor - and the certainty he would continue in this manner - it is obvious that only smart reforms to the buyback program are in order.
Thoughts?



