June 6, 1974
Page 18058
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, in the past I have supported the principle of recomputation for many of the reasons which have been presented by the distinguished Senator from Indiana (Mr. HARTKE). I need not repeat those arguments. But I have reluctantly decided to vote against recomputation this year because our present economic circumstances – and most particularly, the unprecedented rate of inflation which we have been suffering – requires special restraint in new Government expenditures.
Before 1958 retired pay was recomputed, or increased, each time there was a pay increase for active forces to keep pace with rising prices. Since then military retirees have had their retired pay adjusted according to changes in the cost-of-living index, as is done for Federal civilian retirees. The "recomputation" issue is whether, in addition to the cost-of-living increases, military retirees should also have their retired pay adjusted to be kept current with active duty pay scales.
Those who support the proposal, which has twice passed the Senate, but not the House, argue that the Government has broken faith with retirees who entered service before 1958 by changing the system. Those opposed point out that a double escalation of retired pay (cost-of-living plus recomputation) would be unprecedented in Government or outside it; the cost, even for a one-time plan for older retirees, would be about $16 billion over the lifetimes of those affected.
Because of this extraordinary cost, I must vote against Senator HARTKE's amendment. I hope we will continue to examine the whole question of retired military pay, and I welcome the assurances of Senator STENNIS that the Armed Services Committee will look carefully at this issue in the near future.