Saturday, May 07, 2005
No soup for you!
A proposal that would ensure that federal employees mobilized as guardsmen or reservists would see no loss in pay while on federal military duty has been dropped from the budget.
The article says, actually, that the amendment would ensure that mobilized federal employees would "continue to receive their full paycheck," which doesn't seem right to me. If so, then that's just ridiculously expensive. But if the federal government orders a federal employee overseas involuntarily, then some sort of mechanism to ensure continuity of pay doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
We need to guard against the tendency of reservists to also be government employees. The political logic of reserve component forces, and the Abrams doctrine requires that we draw on the private sector for our reservists. The danger is that as obligations increase, the only people who will hire reservists and ensure them job security is the government.
That is not a good idea, in the long term, as it only increases the cultural separation between the Army and civilians. If the Army is to be effective, if it is truly to be the extention of the national will, then it imperative that the Army represent America. So that if the Army goes to war, it means that America goes to war behind it, and the Army will never be deployed if the will of America cannot be mobilized along with it.
Splash, out
Jason
The article says, actually, that the amendment would ensure that mobilized federal employees would "continue to receive their full paycheck," which doesn't seem right to me. If so, then that's just ridiculously expensive. But if the federal government orders a federal employee overseas involuntarily, then some sort of mechanism to ensure continuity of pay doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
We need to guard against the tendency of reservists to also be government employees. The political logic of reserve component forces, and the Abrams doctrine requires that we draw on the private sector for our reservists. The danger is that as obligations increase, the only people who will hire reservists and ensure them job security is the government.
That is not a good idea, in the long term, as it only increases the cultural separation between the Army and civilians. If the Army is to be effective, if it is truly to be the extention of the national will, then it imperative that the Army represent America. So that if the Army goes to war, it means that America goes to war behind it, and the Army will never be deployed if the will of America cannot be mobilized along with it.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Post a Comment
