Pentagon Report On Ex-Spouse Law Crawls Toward Completion
By Tom Philpott
Bitter differences between military retirees and ex-spouses over
the
Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act explain a
decade of
political inertia.
Thousands of retirees and ex-spouses view the law as grossly
unfair,
and look to Congress for relief. But the likelihood of
meaningful
change remains slim. And this seems true even as the Defense
Department struggles to complete a report for Congress on the
USFSPA
that has taken almost three years to complete and is nine months
overdue.
Lt. Cmdr. Catherine Wdowiak, of Tucson, Ariz., is one retiree
who
favors reform. Because of the law, she said, the Navy each month
sends 18.5 percent of her retired pay to a man she divorced in
1996
after he revealed he was having an affair.
Her ex-spouse remarried and that couple now earns more than
$100,000
per year, said Wdowiak, while she struggles to keep a fledgling
business afloat on what remains of her retired pay, about
$24,000 a
year.
Her ex-spouse gets a chunk of her retirement, Wdowiak said, even
though it was her military pay and benefits that gave him the
freedom
to earn a degree during their 11-year marriage. But the Arizona
judge, she said, refused to consider ``fault'' in dividing
marriage
property. ``He said his hands were absolutely tied by the
USFSPA,''
Wdowiak recalled.
``I'm not saying the law is 100 percent wrong. There are people
who
deserve [a share of retired pay] and, in some cases, even more
than
is being awarded,'' said Wdowiak. ``But I don't think the law
was
intended for someone who gets a degree [using a member's pay],
chooses to leave you and now makes more money than you do. I
think
it's intended for persons who sacrifice their careers to support
the
military person.''
Edward C. Schilling III, a retired Air Force colonel and lawyer
in
Aurora, Colo., is an expert on the USFSPA. Each year, across the
country, he advises hundreds of attorneys and their clients,
mostly
ex-spouses but also retirees and service members, on how to get
the
best deal when dividing pensions in divorce.
The problem with the USFSPA, argues Schilling, is not how it
treats
military retirees; they enjoy more protections in divorce
settlements
than other Americans. The problem with the law is it allows so
many
military retirees to shield from divorce settlements some or all
of
their retired pay, by accepting VA disability compensation
instead,
often for injuries or illnesses unrelated to combat or even
military
service.
Schilling, former head the Air Force's legal assistance program,
said
he sees ``an enormous volume of cases involving long-term
marriages
that end when the husband dumps the wife and kids, and runs off
with
some young skirt.''
Pending before Congress is legislation to ``reform'' the USFSPA
from
a retiree's perspective. Key provisions of HR72, sponsored by
Rep.
Bob Stump (R-Ariz.), would end division of retired pay when an
ex-spouse remarries and would stop ``windfall'' payments to
ex-spouses resulting from promotions or longevity raises earned
after
the divorce. It also would limit to two years the time an
ex-spouse
has to seek a share of retired pay following divorce, and
tighten the
law's restriction on sharing of disability retirement.
In 1997, Congress decided to stall consideration on Stump's
bill, in
the face of conflicted pressure from retirees and ex-spouse
groups,
by ordering DoD to study the existing law and to deliver a
report,
with recommendations, by Oct. 1, 1999.
``Because it's such a high-intensity issue,'' said Schilling,
``you
keep from antagonizing either group by doing nothing.''
The deadline passed with no report -- and little complaint from
Congress.
Stump, chairman of the House Veterans Committee, believes the
law
treats military retirees unfairly, but few colleagues in
leadership
roles want to join that fight. They see only a legislative
hornets'
nest that, when bumped, spews clouds of horror stories from both
retirees and ex-spouses.
But Schilling, who has advised on more than 2000 divorce cases
since
retiring in 1989, said Stump and many retirees are mistaken to
believe the USFSPA is unfair.
``Each state makes its decision on how pensions will be divided.
The
same rules apply to everybody, whether they work for the post
office,
the FAA, Lucent Technologies, the Teamsters' Union or as a
school
teacher,'' said Schilling.
When military retiree clients hear this, he said, ``they are
dumbfounded. They don't believe I'm telling the truth because
they've
gotten the idea that the military is picked on. But the fact is,
if
you have a U.S. senator divorcing in one courtroom and an Air
Force
colonel divorcing in the next, the law gives the colonel more
protection.''
Some of the extra protection, Schilling said, include the law's
definition of ``disposable'' retired pay and its 50 percent
limit on
retired pay that can be divided as property, even when multiple
ex-spouses are involved. The USFSPA also limits which states
have
jurisdiction to order military finance centers to divide an
annuity.
By ordering DoD to study the USFSPA, said Schilling, Congress
made
``a blatant attempt to try to punt, and hope the game plays
out.''
The game continues, although, it seems, in slow motion. Last
March,
six months after the congressional deadline, Stump wrote Defense
Secretary William Cohen to ask when Congress would see the
report. It
took Cohen and staff six weeks to respond, explaining that the
services were reviewing a draft.
``We hope to be able to build a consensus among the services and
forward it to the Office of Management and Budget for clearance
shortly after we receive their submissions,'' Cohen wrote.
After a month's extension, service submissions were due July 1.
A
Defense official said July 11 he hadn't seem them yet. And Navy
Capt.
Elliott Bloxom, Cohen's director of military compensation, said
last
week he is ``tired of guessing'' when a report will be ready.
``Every time I give somebody a date...I fail abjectly,'' said
Bloxom.
``So I don't guess anymore.''
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
A woman got the Shaft this time. Men have been taking a beating like this for decades.
The way it should work is, If you leave your Spouse, for reasons other than Cheating or Spouse Abuse, you get NADA!. If you don't want to be with the Man, then you don't want his money.
SF Jose
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
