With all that we ask of our military service members these days, it's the least we can do to support our troops in every way we can, including increasing their pay to help close the gap between military and civilian pay. But the White House disagrees (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_payhike_whitehouse_070516/).
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization bill.

The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5 percent pay increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are 0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.

The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay increase.

Bush budget officials said the administration “strongly opposes” both the 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and the follow-on increases, calling extra pay increases “unnecessary.”
Is this how they "support the troops"?

Speaking from a perspective of a 20 year military career, the military always needs a little more. In addition to gas, groceries, and the utility bill the military person always gets stuck with extra clothing expenses (and all of the services are updating uniforms again) and the military families usually have greater child care expenses that thier private scetor counterparts.

Well, being the son of a veteran and Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, I certainly know the travails of the military family. With all we ask military families to do and sacrifice, a 3.5% wage increase is the bare minimum we should be offering.

What do you think, Andy?