In my last hurrah as a columnist, I must make something clear to my dear readers. Though I may not slap a yellow ribbon sticker on the back of my vehicle, and I may not support the war in Iraq or the administration that started it, I certainly support our troops.
My mother taught me well that when it comes to the military, it's about hating the game, not the player. My first lesson came in August 1990 at the age of four, when my father, a master sergeant with the Wisconsin Air National Guard 128th Air Refueling Wing, was deployed first to an air base in Spain during Desert Shield, and later to Saudi Arabia during Desert Storm.
Nothing is more terrifying for a small child than waking up in the middle of the night to find her father packing his bags to leave for an undisclosed mission.
Moreover, nothing is more harrowing for a spouse than to have her husband sent to an undisclosed location for an undisclosed period of time, as she is left to keep the family together and wonder what will transpire.
Flash forward several years to March 2003—to a different Bush and a different war in the same country. Military children all over the United States cry out in the middle of the night as their mommies and daddies are called to active duty. Spouses are left to deal with emotional and financial burdens of military deployment.
Though often depicted as jarheads, the members of the U.S military are not always a hapless band of traveling soldiers. They are often fathers, mothers, husbands and wives, and what affects these fighting men and women affects their dependents as well.
Therefore, I applaud the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel approval last week of a 2.7 percent pay raise for the military to take effect in January, which is higher than the 2.2 percent that President Bush had recommended in his 2007 budget.
A higher pay raise will aid in closing the gap between military and private salaries: a gap that may be a factor in hindering military recruiting.
This pay increase will also help offset the difficult financial burden that many reservists' families face if the service-person has lost his or her civilian job while deployed.
The House subcommittee has temporarily blocked the Bush administration's plan to increase fees for the military's healthcare program Tricare as well.
The delay on the issue of expenses has been pushed back to Dec. 31, 2007, with the goal of designing a comprehensive policy and fiscal basis for sustaining the future military healthcare benefit,\ according to a statement from Rep. John M. McHugh, R-N.Y.
Tricare, which Congress has expanded over the past few years, provides military personnel with health benefits from retirement until Medicare eligibility.
This program is a definite necessity, and the blocking of this fee increase should not be temporary. Allowing the costs of healthcare premiums to skyrocket would break the promise of affordable care to the nearly three million military retirees and their families.
Health coverage for veterans and families of soldiers should not have heavy bureaucratic red tape barring easy access and proper care. Congress has taken the first steps on the correct path toward true care of military health. The Bush administration must now get the message.
Our nation cannot spend money on funding a war in which so many U.S. troops have died or been wounded without appropriately providing the necessary health care. Support the troops: Bring them home safely and with adequate compensation.
Kelly Schlicht is a sophomore majoring in journalism. This is her final column in The Daily Cardinal. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.\
