March 2025
The Military Officers Association of America (MOAA) has always advocated for a strong national defense, with a particular focus on the people whose service and sacrifices make it possible. Maintaining this strength requires both sufficient funding and a capable workforce. However, the nation’s growing debt and fiscal challenges pose a significant risk to future prosperity and place increasing pressure on our ability to sustain a robust force.
Given this reality, ongoing budget scrutiny to find efficiencies and savings is not only appropriate but necessary. However, early results from these exercises and actions have highlighted the need for thoughtful implementation and greater caution as budget reviews continue. There have been opportunities to reconsider and reverse rapid decisions when their negative consequences became evident; a prime example came in the protection of military spouses with existing remote-work arrangements from a return-to-work directive that would’ve significantly harmed military families. We must balance fiscal responsibility with maintaining a strong and prepared all-volunteer force, ensuring the nation upholds its promises to those Americans and their families who commit themselves to uniformed service and sacrifice for their country.
Those who serve and have served in uniform make extraordinary commitments and sacrifices — not only for our national defense, but for the very ideals that define America: freedom, security, and prosperity. Military members uphold the foundation of economic prosperity and freedoms all Americans enjoy — foundations built by veterans. These servicemembers swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, many putting their lives on the line, to make this happen. They don’t join to get rich or receive accolades, they join to defend and protect liberties often taken for granted. In return, they expect the nation to honor its commitments and uphold promises made to care for them and their families both during and after their service. Fulfilling these promises is essential to ensuring those who wear the uniform — and their families — continue to encourage future generations to serve.
Despite statements to the contrary, some of the cuts made to the federal workforce and budget have negative consequences for the uniform services community, veterans, and families. Veterans, who make up approximately 30% of the federal workforce, are being dismissed. The speed of current actions is preventing recognition of the previous commitments made by the nation through veterans’ hiring preferences. Similarly, military spouses who are granted a federal hiring preference are also being let go. For military spouses, the impact extends beyond household income—their job loss directly impacts the readiness and retention of their uniformed partners. Military families increasingly rely on dual incomes, and the loss of that second income stream plays a significant role in the decision to remain in service. These preferences were not established as handouts, but as a strategic investment recognizing the vital role of these workers in supporting recruiting, retention, and overall warfighting readiness.
Unfortunately, in the rush to make reductions, broad assumptions have emerged that veterans and spouses are simply being handed employment. In reality, their unique skillsets, experience, and dedication are highly valued and difficult to replace. Many of these individuals sought federal jobs so they could continue to serve the country and, in some cases, keep their military family together, when they could have commanded higher salaries in the private sector. As demonstrated in previous reversals and during DOGE updates that have highlighted a need to clean up the inevitable mistakes, some of these actions should be reversed quickly to eliminate inadvertent impacts on national defense.
The pace of current actions underscores the need to apply lessons learned and proceed with greater caution as budget reduction efforts, such as those announced for DoD, take place. As in previous budget-cutting exercises, it is not unusual for operations and maintenance and military personnel accounts to receive the most scrutiny. These tend to be the easiest areas to generate quick savings, free from the political or contractual concerns associated with other parts of the budget.
Once again, the right statements about supporting the uniformed service members and families who bear the burden are being made. But history tells us budget discussions often lead to reductions in "people programs" — housing allowances, healthcare benefits, cost-of-living adjustments, compensation, and manpower reductions themselves. These cuts may appear to offer immediate savings, but they have often proven more expensive thanks to unintended long-term costs:
· Retention and Recruitment Risks: Reductions in benefits make military service less attractive, weakening our ability to maintain a skilled and ready force.
· Readiness Degradation: Morale and stability among servicemembers decline when financial security is undermined.
· Historical Lessons Ignored: Past budget reductions, such as those seen during the 2014-2016 sequestration period and after Operation Desert Storm, led to force management challenges and cost more to correct. The costs to hastily reverse force reductions made without connections to actual defense strategies were significant. Even more costly was the extensive loss of experience, as new recruits replaced experienced members (who were in many cases paid to depart).
If increasing focus on warfighting and meritocracy is a target, then addressing harder but more lucrative places to generate savings should be in the plan. Though more difficult given the amount of associated political considerations, there are opportunities to generate savings through responsible defense budget reform:
1. Efficient Program Management: Allowing defense leaders to shutter outdated programs, weapon systems, and infrastructure through a BRAC would free up significant funds.
2. Acquisition Reform: Addressing inefficiencies in the procurement process would reduce costs.
3. Long-Term Fiscal Planning: Instead of making hasty cuts to meet short-term budget targets, policymakers should focus on sustainable financial strategies that prevent costly course corrections.
The men and women in uniform understand their duty to serve and protect this nation. It is the nation's duty to ensure their sacrifices are honored — not just with words, but with policies that reflect the value of their service. Budget constraints must be addressed — even within DoD and the VA, but cuts should not come at the expense of those who have given so much. By working together — lawmakers, advocacy groups, and the American public — we must find fiscally responsible solutions that uphold our commitment to those who serve.
MOAA stands ready to work in a bipartisan way to ensure that we, as a nation, fulfill the promises made to those who serve and have served — along with their families. Now is not the time to erode our servicemembers’ earned benefits. Rather, it’s time to find solutions.
Jim Carman, CAE
Captain, U.S. Navy (Retired)
Vice President Council/Chapter and Member Support
Military Officers Association of America (MOAA)
201 N. Washington Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22314-2539
800.234.6622; ext 107
Direct: 703.838.8107
www.moaa.org
