Alternative to denying R & R
Letters to the Editor, January 27, 2012
I am a member of a National Guard unit wrapping up a one-year activation, nine months of which was spent in Kabul. Our replacements — also a National Guard unit — are here, just beginning their nine months. While we were able to enjoy a 15-day R & R during our tour, to go home and see our families and recharge our batteries, our replacements will be denied this luxury.
I do not purport to be an arbiter of what constitutes a right and proper government expenditure or what constitutes a right and proper spending cut; that is the job of Congress, not an E-6. However, it is completely fair for me to look upon this choice by our Congress and the Department of Defense as a reflection of the values of both.
Subsequently, it is my opinion that the lavish benefits and lengthy vacations of Congress and civilian DOD members should have been trimmed before deployed soldiers were asked to spend nine months in a war zone with only a four-day pass as a respite. I do not mean to equate R & R with an entitlement — it is a privilege — but when weighing the value of my R & R against an extra recess for a congressman, or a reduced copayment to a civilian who never leaves the Pentagon, the choice is clear to me where the cut would come.


