Budget request includes TRICARE cut, military retirement details

Defense Comptroller Robert Hale Defense Comptroller Robert Hale Defense Department

President Obama proposed new TRICARE co-pays and fees, as well as a review of military retirement benefits, in his fiscal 2013 budget unveiled Monday.

The administration provided new details on Defense Department personnel cuts first proposed in January.

The budget includes new TRICARE co-pays, additional increases to TRICARE Prime enrollment fees, initiation of standard and extra annual enrollment fees, and adjustments to deductibles and catastrophic coverage caps.

The budget proposal also modifies pharmacy co-pays to encourage the use of less expensive mail-order and military treatment facility pharmacies, and includes modest annual fees for Medicare-covered beneficiaries older than 65 (TRICARE for Life).

The administration said these changes would save Defense an estimated $12.9 billion in discretionary funding and $4.7 billion in mandatory savings on Medicare-eligible retiree health care over the next five years. It is projected to save the department $12.1 billion over the next 10 years.

Defense implemented TRICARE Prime fee increases for new retiree enrollees beginning in fiscal 2012; under the 2013 proposal, the fees would be phased in based on annual retirement pay.

The TRICARE fee increases mean that military retirees in upper-income tiers would see their health care contributions nearly quadruple over the next five years, Defense Comptroller Robert Hale told reporters Monday. “It’s quite generous compensation compared to private sector plans,” Hale said, adding the department could “revisit” the personnel figures -- which make up $135.1 billion of the fiscal 2013 base budget -- if the economy were to improve.

The proposal includes some good news for military families: It provides $48.7 billion for the Defense Unified Medical Budget to support the Military Health System and $8.5 billion to support the “well-being and psychological health of the military family, ensuring excellence in military children’s education and their development, developing career and educational opportunities for military spouses, and increasing child care,” budget documents said.

The president’s budget proposal provides a 1.7 percent increase to basic military pay in calendar 2013, the full increase authorized by current law.

But the request recommends slowing pay raises after 2014, capping them at 0.05 percent in fiscal 2015, 1 percent in fiscal 2016 and 1.5 percent in fiscal 2017. This idea was first introduced in January in Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s highlights of the budget.

“If it turns out we can’t attract and retain the people we need in the out years, then we won’t do that,” Hale said. “The big thing is, there’s no pay cuts and no prefreezes so we’re really just slowing the growth in the out years.”

Monday’s proposal does provide a few more details on the department’s recommendation to target military retirement benefits as a source of savings by establishing a commission to review them. According to the administration’s proposal, Defense would transmit to a presidentially appointed commission initial recommendations on how to change the military retirement system; the commission would hold hearings, make final recommendations and draft legislation to implement its recommendation. The president would again weigh in on the commission recommendations and send them to lawmakers. The proposal would also include “grandfathering provisions” for current retirees and active-duty members.

Federal Managers Association President Patricia Niehaus argued that proposed reductions in retirement benefits are “evenly split” between civilian and military retirement programs.”

“By including a 1.7 percent increase in pay for military members in the budget request, President Obama is following in the footsteps of his predecessor and ignoring over two decades of legislative precedent by proposing unequal pay raises for military and civilian federal employees,” Niehaus said in a statement.

“Civil servants and their military counterparts often work side-by-side to ensure the safety of our country,” she added. “We ask the president to reconsider his decision to provide civilian and military employees disparate raises.”

Other groups have suggested the administration’s proposals to cut military costs don’t go far enough. A recent analysis published by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Analysis suggested that the changes in personnel fees in the department’s fiscal 2013 budget request account for roughly one-ninth of the $487 billion total in reductions it is seeking.

TRICARE for Life alone “is costing us $11 billion a year in the Defense budget. That’s not a small amount of money -- that’s basically enough to buy a new carrier every year,” CSBA senior fellow Todd Harrison told reporters at a Defense budget preview last week.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by Brocade

    Best of 2016 Federal Forum eBook

    Earlier this summer, Federal and tech industry leaders convened to talk security, machine learning, network modernization, DevOps, and much more at the 2016 Federal Forum. This eBook includes a useful summary highlighting the best content shared at the 2016 Federal Forum to help agencies modernize their network infrastructure.

  • Sponsored by CDW-G

    GBC Flash Poll Series: Merger & Acquisitions

    Download this GBC Flash Poll to learn more about federal perspectives on the impact of industry consolidation.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    A DevOps Roadmap for the Federal Government

    This GBC Report discusses how DevOps is steadily gaining traction among some of government's leading IT developers and agencies.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.

  • Sponsored by CDW-G

    Joint Enterprise Licensing Agreements

    Read this eBook to learn how defense agencies can achieve savings and efficiencies with an Enterprise Software Agreement.

  • Sponsored by Cloudera

    Government Forum Content Library

    Get all the essential resources needed for effective technology strategies in the federal landscape.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.