Armed forces recruitment bonuses and other incentive payments are an essential part of the U.S. military’s recruiting strategy, which aims to recruit the nation’s 1.5 million military personnel, with the goal of bringing a total of 2.5m troops to service by 2020.
But the bonus and other incentives have come under scrutiny, with critics questioning whether they should be given to enlisted members who may not otherwise have received them.
Here’s why military enlistments bonuses and bonus payments are actually a good idea.
Military enlistment bonuses and incentive payments should be used for members who will help bolster the military’s morale, boost morale among active-duty personnel, and help to recruit troops for the United States’ armed forces, according to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report.
The Pentagon’s own data, however, suggests that many military enlistees have less than a one-in-ten chance of getting a military bonus.
“We are not giving our soldiers a one in a million chance to get an incentive that is worth $5 million,” Army Maj. Gen. David F. Rogers, a senior military adviser to the president, said in a statement.
The military should provide incentives to those who have the highest probability of getting an incentive and those who can most afford it, including those who are young, unmarried, and don’t have kids, he added.
“For those who do not have the best odds, we need to make sure the incentive is appropriate and appropriate for their circumstances.
That means that incentives should be applied equally to all who are willing to work hard to achieve their goals.”
In 2016, the Defense Department awarded an additional $5.7 billion in military enlisting bonuses to enlisted personnel who were 21 to 31 years old and who were employed full time, a move that was criticized by some.
The Obama administration also awarded $1.1 billion to enlisted and non-enlisted personnel who graduated from high school, had at least a high school diploma, and were employed by the federal government, a program that was scaled back after a federal appeals court ruled that it violated the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
But some critics say that while the military should pay out bonuses to those with the highest likelihood of earning the incentive, they should not be awarded to all enlistees.
They also contend that the bonus should not apply to the average person who may receive it, because the average enlistee is likely to be in the military for much less time than an average civilian.
“The average civilian does not get $5 billion to spend on a bonus.
That is the average civilian,” said William McCallum, a retired Army colonel and an associate professor of government at Rutgers University.
“The average enlistees are not getting $5 or $6 million.
The average person is probably getting $3 million to $4 million.
So, in my view, the incentives should not go to those that have the lowest likelihood of receiving them.”
Critics of the incentive programs also contend they violate the Constitution by giving a bonus to a person who has little chance of ever earning a military commission.
“It is a perverse incentive system that incentivizes young, uneducated people to join the military at the expense of people who already have earned a military service,” said Stephen Pyle, a professor of law and public policy at Georgetown University.
“The incentives that are being offered by this program are being used to discourage young people from joining the military and encourage people who have already earned the military service to go to college.
The incentive is not going to pay for the services that the military provides.”
For the full report, click here.