"Victim, Garnishments, Child, Support, Alimony, DFAS, AAUL, Spouse, USFSPA, Join, Payments,
Retainer, No-Fault, Vote, Court, Men, Navy, Marines, Army, Air Force, Coastguard, Support,
Divorce, uniformed services former spouses protection act, veterans, pension, high school,
College, recruiter,retainer, reenlistment, enlistment, medical, dental, health care,
commissioned, officer, law, married, retention, lawyer"
No to USFSPA and Our Ever Eroding Veteran Benefits
Web Master USFSPA VICTIM 1987-Today
Jerry J. Hagan, MMCM, USN Ret. (1959-1980)
Joined Navy in August 1959, Co. 395 SDiego, MM"A" School GLakes, Submarine School NLondon,
Nukpower School MIsland, U.S.S. Bridget (DE-1024), U.S.S. Piedmont (AD-17),
U.S.S. Paricutin (AE-18), AC&R School Instructor SDiego, U.S.S. England (DLG-22), 1200 PSI MTT Team 1 SDiego,
NavMacPac SDiego, Retired July 1980 as a MMCM.
Divorced in 1987 after 25 years, 4 Daughters, 11 Grandchildren, 2 Great Grandsons. I Enjoy Family, Friends, Radio,
Computer, Camping, Fishing, Cooking, Eating, My Truck, Trips Driving, Mountains and the
Early Morning
If You are Thinking of Enlisting in The Armed Forces, Now Serving in or Have Ever Served in the Armed Forces, Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coastguard, Commissioned Officer or Enlisted, Men and Women alike the Information on this Site is of Importance to You. Check it Out!!!!!!!
Want to burn this Flag?
Click Here
USFSPA NEWS ARTICLE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
VETERANS PUSH TO STOP DIVORCE COURTS FROM DIVIDING THEIR RETIREMENT PAY
December 11, 2003, Tampa, FL - A group of divorced veterans met in Arlington, Virginia, December 6-7, 2003, to put the
finishing touches on a federal lawsuit to prevent state divorce courts from dividing their retained/retirement pay.
The ULSG, LLC, veterans' group insists that the Constitution forbids a twenty-year-old federal statute that permits state
divorce courts to divide veterans' retained/retirement pay with their ex-spouses. The law is the Uniform Services Former Spouses
Protection Act
The veterans' group was founded after the failure of legislative efforts to kill the law. About forty of the group's members
met with the ULSG's two lawyers on December 6-7, to finalize plans for filing a federal lawsuit against the law. They plan to file the
lawsuit during the first quarter of 2004.
The USFSPA undoes a Supreme Court ruling that protected veterans' retirement pay from being divided with ex-spouses
in divorce court. The ULSG contends that Congress may have meant well in enacting the USFSPA, but that the law has resulted in
harsh consequences to divorced veterans, many of them unanticipated and unintended.
The group further asserts that among the law's failings is that it does not even exempt veterans who joined the military
before the law was ever passed. The ULSG asserts that this amounts to an unconstitutionally retroactive application of the law,
seeing that the law was passed only after the Supreme Court said that veterans' retirement pay could not be divided in divorce
court.
Over two thousand male and female divorced veterans from an estimated population of over 100,000 who are affected
by this law have already joined the ULSG's plight. The group's litigation effort is being led by attorney Jonathan L. Katz of the law
firm of Marks & Katz, LLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, with substantial assistance from attorney David J. Bederman of Atlanta.
Attorney Katz said: "Divorced veterans have waited long enough to seek a legislative remedy to this unjust law. Now it is
time to resolve the matter in court."
The ULSG's President, Jack C. Crutchfield, said: "We ask for nothing more than fair treatment of the divorced veterans who
have so proudly served their country over the decades. We have assembled a superb legal team to lead our court challenge."
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:
MEDIA INQUIRIES:
Jonathan L. Katz, Attorney at Law
Lead Counsel for ULSG, LLC
Marks & Katz, LLC
1400 Spring Street, Suite 410
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: (301) 495-4300
Fax: (301) 495-8815
E-mail: jon@markskatz.com
www.markskatz.com
The Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act. How Our Government Allows States to Rob a Veteran of Their
Retired Pay By: Michael L. Buie, ET1 (SS),US Navy Retired What if American men and women no longer find it a
worthwhile endeavor to join, and make a career of, the United States Military? What if our national leadership,
our Congress and the indifference of the American people sabotaged the only organization dedicated to defending our
freedoms... our very way of life?
This Article addresses one of the single largest benefits our government has reneged upon, through betrayal
legislation by Congress. It constitutes one of the main reasons many Military Retirees no longer recommend Military
Service as a career today.
The Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act sounds benevolent enough; financial protection
of former spouses of military retirees is it's pretended intent. What it has become, is the single most reprehensible
means of depriving the military retired the pension he or she was promised.
"What", you ask, "is the big problem?"
Think of it: with a divorce rate of greater than fifty percent in this country (and higher among our nation's military),
it is a given that the married career military service member stands less than a fifty-fifty chance of keeping their
earned military retired pay. Who, in their right mind, will make a career of the armed forces of this country when they
realize this great lie perpetrated upon Military Retired?
You ask, "But why shouldn't the ex-spouse of a military
retiree be entitled to part of the retiring member's pension? Isn't it property built up throughout the marriage? Isn't
that joint property to be divided between the two if the marriage expires, no matter who contributed the most to this pension?"
I might agree with that presumption if Military Retainer were a pension.
The fact is, Military Retired Pay is a "Retainer",
described by even the United States Supreme Court as a "Retainer for Reduced Services". The military member does NOT contribute into
a pension fund or retiree's plan to receive his or her Retainer. When the Career Serviceman or Servicewoman accepts
Retired Pay, they obligate themselves to be subject to recall to military service, to be subject to the Uniformed Code of
Military Justice and are members of the Reserves. They cannot work jobs incompatible with their US Military related position.
They can't be members of questionable organizations. The Retired Military member is being paid a Retainer for continued
obligation to the United States Armed Services. What, you say, has this got to do with our children's well being? I say
"Everything!" As this nation's misapplication of law devastates mother OR father in the termination of a marriage, the children
of that deceased marriage suffer! When we destroy the supporting parent, we destroy at least half of the dependant child's
support base. Embittering one who has served their country, at best, creates a hardship on that individual who has EARNED,
and continues to earn their Military Retainer. At worst, Retired and Vets who are disabled are having half (more or less)
of their only source of income deprived from them to sustain themselves. In some cases, these disabled Military Retirees are the
ones caring for their children at home. Meanwhile, many an ex-spouse of the Military Retired remarries, is part of a two-income
home, and still collects half of the struggling Service Person's Retirement!
I ask you today, America... is this justice? Is this fair? Is this right? No! It is a foul misdeed perpetrated upon the
protectors of YOUR freedoms by greedy lawyers, money-hungry ex-spouses, unthankful states and an unfaithful government!
Historically, Military Retirement became fair game when Congress-people like Pat Schroeder (alongside lobbying by feminist groups)
pushed legislation in with other appropriations bills; legislation that induced Congress, over rulings by the US Supreme Court in
the matter, to treat Military Retirement as property. The Supreme Court ruled in McCarty v. McCarty on June 26, 1981 that,
"The military retirement system confers no entitlement to their retainer upon the retired member's spouse," and "that retired
pay continues to be the personal entitlement of the retiree." Conjuring images of thirty year Military man leaving their
unskilled, uneducated, yet dedicated wives soon after retirement; the enemies of our veteran led Congress to believe the
women of this country needed additional protection from the defenders of our liberty. Thus, the abomination called the USFPSA was
created! Note: Due to size limitations this letter was shortened.
Click Here to see How to Correct the USFSPA Problem!
How About it Congress - Do Whats Right
USFSPA
Do You
want to Do Your Part in Fighting
the Injustice With Our Eroding Veteran Benefits
and USFSPA - Join Below
to keep up with what is taking place and See Just What You Can Do To Assist in The Battle Below
This group dedicated solely to fighting the USFSPA
Attention Ladies Click Here
The primary objective of GI-JANES is the repeal of the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA).
Until this is accomplished, a secondary objective is to compel the Department of Defense and the military services to fully brief all
personnel about the USFSPA and the effect it will have on military members should they ever experience a divorce after being married
while in the service. This should occur upon entry into the Services and should re-occur during annual training each year thereafter.
USFSPA NEWS ARTICLE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
USFSPA
View My Guestbook
Sep. 10, 2008
