U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

i 

57–699 2010

[H.A.S.C. No. 111–135] 

LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES IN SUPPORT 

OF FAMILIES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

MILITARY PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

HEARING HELD 

MARCH 15, 2010 
(II) 

MILITARY PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California, Chairwoman 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

HANK JOHNSON, Georgia 

CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota 

THOMAS J. ROONEY, Florida 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

JOHN C. FLEMING, Louisiana 

MIKE HIGGINS, Professional Staff Member 

JEANETTE JAMES, Professional Staff Member 

JAMES WEISS, Staff Assistant 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS 

2010 

Page 

HEARING: 

Monday, March 15, 2010, Legislative Priorities in Support of Families ............. 1 

APPENDIX: 

Monday, March 15, 2010 ......................................................................................... 21 

MONDAY, MARCH 15, 2010 

LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES IN SUPPORT OF FAMILIES 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Davis, Hon. Susan A., a Representative from California, Chairwoman, Military Personnel Subcommittee ............................................................................. 1 

Wilson, Hon. Joe, a Representative from South Carolina, Ranking Member, 

Military Personnel Subcommittee ...................................................................... 2 

WITNESSES 

Cohoon, Dr. Barbara, Government Relations Deputy Director, National Military Family Association ....................................................................................... 4 

Hruska, Kelly, Government Relations Deputy Director, National Military 

Family Association ............................................................................................... 4 

Moakler, Kathleen B., Government Relations Director, National Military 

Family Association ............................................................................................... 3 

Savant, Katie, Government Relations Deputy Director, National Military 

Family Association ............................................................................................... 5 

Wheeler, Candace, Government Relations Deputy Director, National Military 

Family Association ............................................................................................... 5 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Davis, Hon. Susan A. ....................................................................................... 25 

Moakler, Kathleen B., joint with Dr. Barbara Cohoon, Kelly Hruska, 

Candace Wheeler, and Katie Savant ........................................................... 28 

Wilson, Hon. Joe ............................................................................................... 26 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

[There are were no Documents submitted.] 

WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: 

[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: 

[There were no Questions submitted post hearing.] 

(1) 

LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES IN SUPPORT OF FAMILIES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, MILITARY PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE, Washington, DC, Monday, March 15, 2010. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 5:34 p.m., in room 

2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Susan A. Davis (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN A. DAVIS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA, CHAIRWOMAN, MILITARY 

PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE 

Mrs. DAVIS. Good afternoon, everybody. Let me just get my sea 

legs for two seconds, having just flown in, but I really appreciate 

your all being here. This is such an important topic and we are 

pleased that such a broad group of folks from the Military Family 

Association, with your expertise and help and support, could be 

with us. We are looking forward to this hearing. Thank you. 

The hearing will come to order. 

The focus of today’s hearing is a review of the priority legislative 

initiatives needed to support military families, and we have asked 

the National Military Family Association, the association with the 

greatest expertise regarding family issues, to help us understand 

how the Congress can best assist our military families. 

This hearing follows a subcommittee hearing on March 9, just 

last week, that featured researchers from the RAND Corporation 

and the Army War College, who related the conclusions of two 

studies to assess the effects of deployment on military children. 

The RAND study, as you know, was sponsored by the National 

Military Family Association, and I want to congratulate the association for investing in an excellent study that advanced our knowledge of the toll that war exacts from the children of those that 

serve. 

This is the second of our hearings scheduled to last for the one 

hour that is available to us prior to our votes at 6:30, so I would 

ask you to remain mindful of that. 

I think this is a terribly important topic, and as I read through 

all of your comments and the work that you have put into it, it 

may be that we need to go on and schedule again, but I know trying to get here are at 5:30 isn’t always easy from California; so we 

will do what we can. 

I also wanted to thank you for the emphasis that you had on 

mental health and for looking at the whole family because I think 

those are very important issues. I think we have addressed it to 
2 

a limited extent, but I am hoping that throughout the discussion 

that we can focus on it some more. 

I want to welcome our witnesses: Mrs. Kathleen Moakler, Government Relations Director, and I know you have been in that 

place for a long time. Thank you. Dr. Barbara Cohoon, Government 

Relations Deputy Director; Ms. Kelly Hruska, Government Relations Deputy Director as well; Mrs. Candace Wheeler, also Government Relations Deputy Director; and Ms. Katie Savant, a Government Relations Deputy Director also. 

So once again thank you so much and I know Mr. Wilson that 

you will have a comment. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mrs. Davis can be found in the Appendix on page 25.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

SOUTH CAROLINA, RANKING MEMBER, MILITARY PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Chairwoman Davis, for holding this 

hearing and thank each of you for being here today. We certainly 

appreciate all of your service on behalf of military families. 

Meeting the needs of military families continues to be challenging and complex. We are a nation at war fighting on two fronts 

and the strains of those wars translate directly and immediately to 

the families of members of the armed forces. When the military 

family unit is disrupted by deployment of a key member of the family, a host of issues arise that stress all aspects of family life— 

physical and mental health, personal finances, interpersonal relationships just to name a few. 

With two sons having served in Iraq and another in Egypt, I 

know the challenges. This subcommittee, the Department of Defense, and the military services have taken a number of initiatives 

to address the needs of military families. Yet there remains evidence much more needs to be done and the system of support that 

has been created may not be adequately meeting the needs of military families. 

Last week we heard testimony on the results of two studies that 

looked at the effects on military children who have deployed parents. Thankfully, these studies seem to suggest our military children are more resilient than we could expect. With that said, it is 

also clear that the well-being of our children is affected by the stability of their family and the emotional strength of the non-deployed parent among other factors. 

While I appreciate the Department of Defense and military services are committed to assisting and supporting military families, I 

am not convinced the right services are getting to the right family 

members at the right time. I am also concerned the provisions of 

family support services are not always completely coordinated and 

integrated. I am also interested in hearing from our witnesses how 

effective the coordination and integration effort is. I am also interested in hearing where we must provide additional effort in the 

form of policy and resources to improve what is already being done. 

With that, Madam Chairwoman, I join you in welcoming our witnesses and I look forward to the testimony. 
3 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wilson can be found in the Appendix on page 26.] 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. 

I know that you have a plan to present a rather quick overview 

and we look forward to that. Thank you. 

Mrs. Moakler, if you would like to begin. 

STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN B. MOAKLER, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DIRECTOR, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Thank you. Chairwoman Davis, Ranking Member Wilson, and other distinguished committee members, thank 

you for the opportunity to speak today on behalf of military families, our nation’s families. Many families are facing their eighth 

year of deployments. Many have dealt with multiple deployments. 

We have second graders who have lived with a parent absent from 

their lives for months at a time over and over again. It is the only 

life they know. We appreciate the many initiatives and programs 

supported by this subcommittee in years past for our service members, retirees, their families, and their survivors. They have become 

part of the overall fabric of family readiness. 

The challenge that now faces us is making sure that our family 

readiness programs receive sustained funding and are included in 

the annual budget process. With budget cuts and shortfalls looming, we should not randomly reduce funding to family programs 

and services across the board. Service members and their families 

cite morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) programs like gyms, libraries, and other installation-provided service as important to 

their well-being during deployments. Substantial cuts to these programs make them wonder why services talk about support yet 

often cut or reduce the same programs that are identified as the 

most important by our families. 

One of the ways to evaluate the efficacy of programs is research. 

In May 2008, we commissioned the RAND Corporation to do a longitudinal study on the experience of 1,500 families. You had the opportunities to hear the result of that study in a hearing last week. 

Our role now is to determine how we use these findings to target 

support to enhance the strength of military families. If total 

months deployed matter, how do we maintain health in the families that are doing okay—that is 70 percent—as they experience 

more deployments? How do we target programs to meet the needs 

of families of school-aged children while not diminishing support 

for families with younger children? How do we engage those who 

interact with older youth, especially girls, with additional information and resources? 

How do we foster relationships between deployed parents, athome caregivers and older children to facilitate healthy reintegration? And how do we help caregivers of older children and youth 

strike a work/life balance? What can Congress, Department of Defense (DOD), and communities do to help in this effort? Ensure 

funding for military family programs consistent with the demands 

created by eight plus years of war; fund YMCA memberships for 

teams and families through the existing DOD contract for at least 

six months post-deployment; develop effectiveness measures for all 
4 

family programs; identify and replicate best practices, camping programs, community outreach, and a focus on reintegration. 

And, as a point of information, we have had 2,552 applications 

submitted since our Operation Purple site opened this morning. 

We also need to publicize resources available to support military 

families and engage nonprofits to identify and meet needs of local 

military families. 

The National Military Family Association for our part is going to 

gather the best minds at a summit in May to engage in a national 

conversation focused on military children and families. We hope to 

develop recommendations into a blueprint for action. And now we 

will hear from Dr. Cohoon. 

STATEMENT OF DR. BARBARA COHOON, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION 

Dr. COHOON. Chairman Davis, Ranking Member Wilson, and distinguished members of this subcommittee, health care access continues to be an issue. The recent implementation and then 

deferment of Medicare reimbursement rate cuts has only heightened our military families’ access concerns. Our Association asserts 

that behind every wounded service member is a wounded family. 

As the war continues, families are also experiencing their own invisible wounds and their need for behavioral health services will 

remain high even after military operations scale down. We appreciate the inclusion of service member caregiver compensation in the 

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) fiscal year 2010; however, we believe this provision did not go far enough. Compensation 

should be a priority. Current law creates a potential gap in compensation following transition and did not include training, health 

care, and expanded respite care benefits. 

In order for caregivers to perform their job well, they must be 

given the skills to succeed. This will require training through a 

standardized civilian-certified program and appropriately compensated. The caregiver self-selection process occurs during the 

early phase of recovery; therefore benefits must be established 

while they are still upstream on active duty. 

And now we will hear from Kelly Hruska. 

STATEMENT OF KELLY HRUSKA, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 

DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION 

Ms. HRUSKA. Chairwoman Davis, Ranking Member Wilson, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today about the exceptional family member program. We appreciate the legislation to establish an office for community support for military families with special needs in this 

year’s NDAA. Our families are anxious for it to stand up and we 

are closely monitoring its progress. However, we must remember 

that our special needs families often require medical, educational, 

and family support resources. This new office must address all 

these various needs in order to effectively implement change. This 

new office will go a long way in identifying and addressing special 
5 

needs, and we will look forward to working with you to remedy 

these issues as they arise. 

And now we will hear from Candace Wheeler. 

STATEMENT OF CANDACE WHEELER, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION 

Mrs. WHEELER. Chairwoman Davis, Ranking Member Wilson, 

and distinguished members of our subcommittee, our association 

has long realized the unique challenges our National Guard and 

Reserve families face and their need for additional support. Our 

Reserve Component families are often geographically dispersed, 

live in rural areas, and do not have the same family support programs as their active duty counterparts. However, in the past several years, great strides have been made by Congress and the services to help strengthen Reserve Component families. We thank you 

for these important provisions and ask that their funding be included in the baseline budget. 

We appreciate Congress’s attention to the Yellow Ribbon program by including reporting requirements in last year’s NDAA. To 

ensure that Yellow Ribbon services are consistent across the nation, we urge you to conduct oversight hearings as well. We also 

ask that the definition of family member be expanded to allow nonI.D. cardholders to attend these important programs in order to 

support their service member and gain valuable information. Although our association applauds the innovative behavioral health 

support programs for our Reserve Component families such as Military OneSource, TRICARE Assistance Program (TRIAP), and Military Family Life Consultants, we remain concerned that not all National Guard and Reserve families have mental health care services 

where they live. 

And now we will hear from Katie Savant. 

STATEMENT OF KATIE SAVANT, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 

DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION 

Ms. SAVANT. Chairwoman Davis, Ranking Member Wilson and 

distinguished members of this subcommittee, enhanced military 

spouse education and employment opportunities are critical to the 

quality of life of military families. The sudden halt of the DOD 

MyCAA program was a financial and emotional strain to nearly 

137,000 spouses. We are pleased the program has been reinstated 

for those currently enrolled. MyCAA provides critical financial support to spouses through all levels of their career progression whether the spouse is new to the workforce or a mid-level professional. 

Military spouses feel empowered and recognized by DOD through 

this program. 

We ask this subcommittee to fully fund the program not only for 

currently enrolled spouses but for those who will need the funding 

in the future. Our military community is experiencing a shortage 

of medical, mental health, and child care providers. Many of our 

spouses would like to seek training in these professions. We encourage DOD to create portable career opportunities for spouses 
6 

seeking in-demand professions. By providing the opportunity to 

grow our own, DOD will help alleviate provider efficiencies. 

Thank you for your support of service members and their families. We urge you to remember their service as you work to resolve 

the many issues facing our country. Working together we can improve the quality of life for all military families. 

We welcome any questions you may have. 

[The joint prepared statement of Mrs. Moakler, Dr. Cohoon, Ms. 

Hruska, Mrs. Wheeler, and Ms. Savant can be found in the Appendix on page 28.] 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you very much. I appreciate all of your comments. 

Perhaps before we start, I think one of the things that is so difficult, and I mentioned in my opening remarks briefly, is 

prioritizing among all these demanding issues that we have before 

us, and I know that is really difficult. We may try from time to 

time to see if we can do some of that. I think that part of the difficulty is we are not comparing apples to apples here, and I don’t 

want to use that in a flippant way, but I think that it is very difficult to say, well, this is more important than that. And yet somehow in there we need to try to do important things to the best of 

our ability and I think that we look to you because you know the 

situation of our families far better and you are far closer to the 

families than we are individually here. 

And so as we go through if there is a way of helping us out with 

that issue, I think, it would be very helpful to do that. 

If I may just go to Ms. Savant for a second because you brought 

up MyCAA. We call it MICA here. I know that is probably not the 

best way to do it. But I wanted to just say as well that I think the 

reason that we were able to move so swiftly with this was because 

of the response of our military family members who reacted very 

quickly. They were alarmed and concerned and I think very upset 

when they saw initially that the program had been pulled at least 

temporarily. So we are very pleased to see that come back online. 

I am wondering as we deal with this, and you mentioned those 

spouses particularly, who perhaps did not have their applications 

in and we know will want to do that in the future, I am wondering 

how you might suggest that we go forward, what suggestions you 

might have to structure the program to fulfill the promise of these 

real educational opportunities and portable professions that we 

need desperately in the services in a fair and cost-effective manner. 

And I don’t know if you have any thoughts about how to reduce the 

costs at all or how you see this coming together. Do you have some 

thoughts and suggestions? 

Ms. SAVANT. Sure. Chairwoman Davis, I would definitely say 

that costs are not something that is my expertise, but I would say 

that this is something that was initially open to all DOD military 

spouses. And as you know, the sudden halt was definitely detrimental to their education and career paths. We had students who 

not only were dropped out of courses but some had to take incompletes, and that can really impact their future career progression. 

So I think that it is great that DOD is doing a review of the program, but we do need to make sure that funding continues for military spouses who want to continue to pursue portable careers. It 
7 

is something that maybe a spouse shouldn’t use initially because 

they weren’t expecting permanent change of station (PCS) orders 

to move, but they are this summer and they might be going to a 

new state where they are required to take new courses in order to 

continue their profession. This funding is critical to them. So I 

apologize I am not able to help with determining funding, but I do 

think that it is critical that we continue this program. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Does anybody else want to comment on that? Great. 

One of the larger areas that we deal with is pay raise, and over 

the last number of years, there has been a real attempt to provide 

an additional bump of a half a percentage point to bring military 

salaries more in line with the private sector. This year the proposal 

does not include that, and yet we know that it really is reflecting 

a raise but not the additional bump and partly because we have 

so many needs out there and I know that the Department of Defense is suggesting that we have come very close, but I would suggest that we are not quite there yet. Can you help us to see—we 

have about 11 years of history by which to judge these relatively 

minor advancements to pay levels and does it trump other issues 

in terms of the number one priority that families have? Are there 

other priorities that you think may really be more critical right 

now? 

Mrs. MOAKLER. We don’t usually address pay issues as an organization, but I know as members of the military coalition we are 

in favor of a pay raise. And as long as there wasn’t a great discrepancy as there was several years ago, we are very pleased of the fact 

that it has caught up to outside pay raises. But if we could focus 

on the mid-career folks because they are the ones that are getting 

out and so we would like to make sure that they have some incentive to stay in. 

Mrs. DAVIS. I have just a second, but can I ask along with those 

priorities as we look at that issue the Survivor Benefit Plan-Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (SBP–DIC) offsets, how 

that really fits into this? A tough question, I know. I understand 

that. 

Mrs. MOAKLER. We have long been supporters of the elimination 

of the DIC offset to the SBP, and we feel that that is an important 

way to respect both the wishes of the service member who had, for 

the most part, for retirees had paid into the SBP fund to provide 

for his family and that the DIC is a separate benefit. That is supposed to reimburse you for any injuries or the death of the service 

member, so that each has a different reason to be paid out, and so 

we really support that that be eliminated. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Mr. Wilson. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you very much, and again thank all of you 

for being here and I appreciate the individual testimony and I have 

never seen such brevity; so thank you very much. 

For any of you, I would like to ask—it has been mentioned in the 

testimony that there are redundancies in military family programs 

and some programs don’t meet the needs of today’s military families. Are there any programs existing today that in your opinion 

should be terminated? If so, what are they? 
8 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Well, I think we need to look at the myriad of 

services that are provided by each of the services, and especially 

in the area of information and referral. It seems like people are 

starting up new programs to collect information from community 

sources and get them out there for military families. But there are 

so many areas to choose from that it gets confusing. So if there 

could be one list, the National Resource Directory is a good start, 

that it be a Purple list. We are all about having Purple programs 

for families. And not that they would lose their individual alternate 

but sometimes too many resources can be confusing. 

Mr. WILSON. And the Internet can be a real resource to help get 

through so you can find it for a particular community. 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Yes. You could put in your zip code and find out 

where those resources are. 

Mr. WILSON. Again, to me, it is exciting that they are so available technologically for families. 

Another recommendation has been to establish a unified joint 

medical command structure within DOD. Can you explain how this 

would be helpful? 

Dr. COHOON. That would be me on this particular one. I handle 

health care for our organization. What we have talked about is 

right now what we are dealing with—the funding happens under 

three different services rather than as far as it being joint, and we 

are looking at what is happening with the National Capital region 

and how that is rolling out. And as we are looking at programs 

that are rolling out, sometimes the best practices aren’t necessarily 

shared across services. And as we stand up at the National Capital 

region where you have Army and Navy working together, and down 

in San Antonio you have Air Force and Army working together, the 

ability to be able to share resources so you are purchasing the 

same equipment, you are teaching your staff as far as utilizing the 

same policies would go a long way as far as keeping down costs but 

also improving the quality of care through efficiencies but also as 

far as patient safety. 

Mr. WILSON. Another example would be the Uniform Services 

University, which is a joint service university and since one of my 

sons is a graduate, I know it is a great institution. So I hope we 

can possibly look into what you suggest. 

Dr. COHOON. We look forward to working with you on that. 

Mr. WILSON. That would be great. 

Then again for anyone who would like to answer, it has been 

suggested that the system of multilayered case managers for 

wounded service members and their families may be aggravating 

the delivery of necessary services to the families. How would you 

streamline the process to make it more effective? 

Dr. COHOON. What we are seeing, again, is all the services are 

rolling out their own programs and their own level of case managers. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is doing the same 

thing. Also we have DOD doing the same thing. And our families 

are getting confused as far as who do you go to for what and when. 

So we have been asking for basically maybe a report to take a look, 

and I knew the GAO was looking at the federal recovery coordinators to see how effective they are being. But also we need to look 

at recovery care coordinators and everyone else. 
9 

What we are finding is that the families sometimes aren’t aware 

that certain case managers are available that they could utilize, i.e. 

the federal recovery coordinators, or that they are in the VA and 

that now they could be using the VA case managers, and instead, 

they are still utilizing the services on top of that. 

So there is a lot of great programs, but we want to make sure 

that we take a look that we haven’t added so many on that it is 

getting confusing for the families. 

Mr. WILSON. Well, your organization serves such a vital function 

as a safety net and as a means of providing assistance to families. 

So I hope you all continue that effort, and I am particularly concerned about a person’s going from DOD care to VA care, that that 

be as seamless as possible and without a hiccup so that people receive services with nobody to fall between the cracks. So thank you 

very much for your time. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Ms. Bordallo. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you, Madam Chairman and Ranking 

Member Wilson. And I do want to thank you ladies for your testimony, and it looks as if services for military families is in very 

good shape from what I have heard. 

You know, it is an old adage that it is not just the man or the 

woman in uniform that serves but the entire family, and I truly believe in that. In recognition for your role, our chairman recently, 

Mr. Ike Skelton, worked to have this year designated as the year 

of the military family, and while Congress has done much, there 

is still a lot more to be done. Now, the National Military Family 

Association has been a strong supporter of the reporting requirements in the 2010 National Defense Authorization bill, and as you 

know, this bill requires the Secretary of Defense to examine the 

housing standards used to distinguish between grades when setting 

housing allowance rates. Some complaints surrounding the notion 

that junior enlisted members and their families can be housed in 

apartments while town homes are adequate for mid-grade noncommissioned officers. Opponents of the standard believe all families should be housed in separate housing units, which is the general standard for the United States. 

I would like to focus on this matter with reference to the Marine 

buildup. I am the representative from the territory of Guam. And 

the current plan involves significant acquisition of our land in 

Guam in order to house the 8,600 additional Marines and their 

families. Due to the significant concern regarding the draft environmental impact statement, I have offered some proposed alternatives to the main bed-down location of the Marines. I have proposed using less land by housing Marines in vertical structures 

such as condominiums. 

I understand that we would all like to have a home and a yard 

but, in some cases, this is just not possible. So with that in mind, 

and I know—I don’t know which one of you is a military housing 

expert, but with that in mind, could you comment on any concerns 

that you would have about building more vertical structures on 

Guam to house our Marine families? Could anybody give us some 

idea? 
10 

Ms. SAVANT. Ma’am, I wouldn’t consider myself an expert, but I 

can certainly try to answer that question for you. I definitely think 

that we need to look at the area where the housing is going to be, 

whether it is in Guam, whether it is in Japan, Hawaii, and we 

need to have standards that meet the standards of that community. 

If that is vertical housing in Guam, then that is the standards of 

that community. Certainly military families do like to have homes, 

but that is not always available in certain areas. In city dwellings 

there are high-rise apartments, and I think as long as the dwellings are meeting the standards of the community and have all the 

safety features that are required, then those are reasonable standards to have. 

Ms. BORDALLO. So as an association, if the standards are up to 

par, you wouldn’t have any objection. Is that pretty much—— 

Ms. SAVANT. Yes. 

Ms. BORDALLO. All right. Thank you. 

Now one more question. I would like to get everyone’s take on 

the implementation across this nation of home station mobilization 

and demobilization for our National Guard and Reserves. I am concerned that this is not occurring as Congress intended. I am wondering what your thoughts are on this process and what more we 

can do to make this a reality. As you all know it significantly degrades military readiness when we force families to travel to active 

duty locations far from their homes. So we need to maintain the 

readiness of our families by fully implementing a home station mobilization and demobilization. 

Mrs. WHEELER. Ma’am, we couldn’t agree with you more. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Mrs. Wheeler. 

Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, I am Candace Wheeler. And we agree, making sure that family has all the support that they have and not 

necessarily having them move during that period of time and giving them all the support. We see a lot of our Guard and Reserve 

actually serving as individual augmentees as well. So we need to 

make certain that those families have the support they need also. 

But, yes, we would support that. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you very much and I thank you for your 

service. It is very important the work you are doing. 

Mrs. WHEELER. Thank you. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Mr. Loebsack. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member 

Wilson for having this important hearing. I thank all of you on the 

panel for everything you are doing. 

It is often said that there are a lot of divisions in this Congress 

on party lines, and there are. I think it is fair to say that Congressman Wilson and I probably don’t agree on very much of anything 

when it comes to policy issues out there, but we actually both have 

very close personal family members who are serving at the moment, and that brings us together certainly on these issues. I think 

that is fair to say, and I think the Congressman would agree with 

that. So I want to thank you for what you are doing here. 

In Iowa, we have a lot of National Guard members, not unlike 

Madam Bordallo in Guam, and we come together on issues all the 

time to work as hard as we can for those Guard and Reserve—— 
11 

Ms. BORDALLO. I have the most per capita. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. That is right. 

Reclaiming my time, at any rate, I am happy to hear, Mrs. 

Wheeler, in particular some of the things that are happening with 

respect to the Guard and Reserve. In the State of Iowa, we have 

3,500 Guard members who are getting ready to deploy to Afghanistan and a number of them have had a number of deployments already, and a lot of us are very concerned, of course, about the families, about the children and about the spouses. In the State of Iowa 

the legislature and the Governor are trying to do some things with 

respect to spouses and employment, to try to deal with these multiple deployments and just a multitude of issues that come up with 

the Guard and Reserve. Again, active duty folks, they have certain 

specific issues. Everyone has the same issues—similar issues, obviously. General Orr, who is our adjutant general, he really is trying 

to place a lot of emphasis on readiness centers and armories as 

focal points for families for services and what have you. Health 

care, obviously another issue as well. 

I want to give you an opportunity, Mrs. Wheeler, just to elaborate a little bit with the time remaining on some of the things that 

you have been working on. I know you folks were wonderful in 

being very brief at the outset here, but I would just like to give you 

some more time to talk about what you are doing and what you 

think needs to be done for the National Guard families. 

Mrs. WHEELER. Thank you. I appreciate the time. We have seen 

a lot of support for our National Guard families in recent years, 

and we do appreciate Congress especially and the services stepping 

forward to help our Guard and Reserve families, whose challenges 

are different than our active duty families. We are seeing some innovative ways of helping. I mentioned a few in my opening. But 

there are some other things as well. There is something called Fort 

Rochester, which is a virtual community that is being stood up and 

I think it is a way of being able to support families. This is under 

the Army program. And I think that is very helpful to not only 

think that it has to be brick and mortar, that how do we get to our 

Reserve Component families? They do not necessarily live in the 

same geographic area. Like I said, many of them live in rural areas 

as well. 

So thinking in more in terms of how do we support them. There 

is been a lot of things in recent times. Some of the things have 

been in like the joint family support program, assistance program, 

the JFSAP. That has been very helpful as well. 

We have also seen the Joint Services Support, which is something you can go to online. A lot of these things are Internet based, 

but we need to remember we need to have touch points with families. It can’t all be through the Internet, and we need to make certain that we are giving them that type of care. Military OneSource 

has been tremendously helpful to be able to have time for families 

to be able to talk with one another and to reach out and have that 

behavioral health support that they need, especially for our children. We are seeing that with our Guard and Reserve children that 

they are—with our RAND study that we went through we are seeing that they are experiencing the same types of things, but it is 
12 

very important for them to understand that they are a military 

family also. 

And in the beginning of this war, many of our Reserve Component families did not feel like military families. They do now. And 

we need to make certain that we are supporting our children and 

the caregiver. We have also realized that when the caregiver has 

the support they need, then the family does better, not only during 

the deployment but during the reintegration period as well. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thank you. 

And just to finish up, I couldn’t agree more with what you are 

saying, and certainly as the Guard and Reserve become an increasing operational force, they are part of the military in that sense, 

very much a part of the military. So thank you very much. I appreciate that. Thanks to all of you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I yield back. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Loebsack. 

I want to turn to the behavioral health issues a little bit, and I 

know Dr. Cohoon—I think all of you have referenced that in some 

way. But one of the concerns that you have expressed is that while 

families see that their loved one in theater may be getting some 

support that the families, when they are trying to get appointments or trying to access some care, are having some difficulty. Is 

there a way that you can perhaps—if you want to clarify some of 

those concerns and what you would suggest. I think you have mentioned the fact that we have a lot of family members who might 

like to develop the skills to be part of the force of behavioral health 

specialists that are serving the military. 

But short of bringing those people into the fields right away, 

what do you think that we need to be focusing on? Compassion fatigue, you have mentioned, creating burnout. What is it that we 

should be focusing on? I might also ask you as you answer that 

question, whether you think that we have done as good a job as 

we should be in integrating with Veterans Affairs as well? I think 

there is a real lack there in terms of transition care. 

And I will be perfectly honest, I am not sure that we do as good 

a job just here in Congress in terms of integrating some of those 

discussions, but I also feel like there could be something more that 

you might suggest in how we can better work with the Veterans 

Administration to answer the needs of many of our families in 

transition. 

Dr. COHOON. Thank you, Chairman Davis. In the beginning of 

the war, we really didn’t have that large of a robust network, especially for mental health providers. What were in the military treatment facilities (MTFs) actually would forward deploy and then that 

left a gap that was in the MTF, but we really didn’t have that large 

of a network in our civilian option. Plus there is also a general 

shortage of mental health providers across the country. Now that 

there has been added funding both for DOD and VA, they have 

been able to bring more providers on board as far as in the direct 

care system, but sometimes they don’t necessarily understand our 

culture. It takes a little while for them to learn about military life. 

That happens too in our civilian network the same way. 

As the network becomes more robust, we need to make sure that 

the mental health providers that our families are exposed to actu-
13 

ally understand our population and our culture, and that would 

make things a lot easier with them. Those that are forward deployed, our mental health providers, we need to make sure that we 

are taking care of them also, that they have time, dwell time, so 

that when they do come back from theater they actually have time 

with their families to reintegrate, and then when they come back 

as far as to help us that they are ready to help us so that the provider themselves has the opportunity as far as to recharge their 

batteries, and a lot of times we are not seeing that. 

With the mental health integration between DOD and VA, that 

is what keeps me up at night. That is what scares me the most. 

Because basically when the military service member decides to 

leave the military—Admiral Mullen has talked about assessing the 

service member to make sure they are ready. We need to assess the 

family too to see how they are doing because once a service member transitions over to the VA status, depending upon what is 

going on, the family may not qualify for a lot of different services. 

They can buy COBRA so they could keep TRICARE for 36 months. 

They can use the Vet centers. 

But for the most part, a lot of opportunities for them and access 

to care goes away. When we are looking at funding for both DOD 

and VA, we are maybe taking providers from the state health agencies which is maybe where families end up going because they no 

longer have health care coverage; so we need to make sure that all 

the systems are working together because we are not fighting over 

the same resources since we have a shortage. 

Mrs. DAVIS. I believe that we are supposed to be looking at that 

as a result of the last bill that went through, and I am just wondering whether—have you had any sense that that is moving along 

at all, in the VA? I think there was an authorization to look at 

these issues further than what we have done in the past; is 

that—— 

Dr. COHOON. Right. We appreciate any time that we are going 

to take a look at a program to see how well it is working or not 

working, and the VA is stepping up to the plate as far as wanting 

to bring in service members and their family when they are still 

active duty. We call it upstream. Then when they come in, then 

they are being assessed at that particular point and able to provide 

them services during that time. So that allows the family then to 

be introduced to the VA and to what sort of system of care is available and obviously we have seen the network increase tremendously as far as within the DOD TRICARE system. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Is there any sense that families would resist filling 

out surveys? We know that even the men and women who serve 

have some difficulty initially in wanting to be part of that for fear 

of not being able to go home or issues of stigma that seem to prevail. Have you heard anything? Are families really asking that they 

are surveyed and that there are forms that they could respond to 

that would suggest the level of their need? 

Dr. COHOON. Stigma does exist even with our families for lots of 

different reasons. It is present in society as a whole, and so you are 

trying to break that particular cultural barrier on top of all of it. 

We really have been asking our families to be evaluated the same 

way that the service member is predeployment, during the deploy-
14 

ment, and post-deployment just to see how they are doing. They 

were included in the Cohort Millennium Study, and we are looking 

forward to seeing what type of information we get from there. But 

we are really not getting the pulse of really how our families are 

doing. 

Our study did—had wonderful findings, but we are just scratching the surfaces and when the longitudinal pieces come out, we will 

be able to find out more and more information. But we have been 

asking that we start assessing how our families are doing. And 

even when the war winds down, we are also wanting to make sure 

that we have programs in place that we continue to, as far as we 

can, to bring more mental health providers on board and we keep 

surveying them on how they are doing. 

Mrs. DAVIS. What do you think is the best mechanism for doing 

that, then? I know we have telephone mental health where service 

members and perhaps you can tell me if their families as well 

would have the opportunity to access someone anywhere in the 

country who is there to be able to listen and to recommend some 

strategy, some treatment for them? Is that an important vehicle for 

that? How can we best assess—— 

Dr. COHOON. Well, telephone mental health is great because it 

helps Candace’s population, which is the Guard and Reserve. If it 

is nonmedical care, then it doesn’t make any difference as far as 

where you sit as far as physically and where you are providing care 

where that individual sitting. But if it is medical care, we are looking at geographical barriers as far as licensing, as far as being able 

to provide the medical care, and we have been asking for that to 

be looked at to see if there are ways in which we can open that 

particular door up. There are some wonderful programs coming 

out. 

There needs to be some better education to our families as far 

as what the programs do, why they should be utilized. And especially the TRIAP program, there are some great opportunities 

there, but our families, I think a little bit with stigma, but also as 

far as not really understanding this new concept, that they haven’t 

really embraced it as much as we would like to see done. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Mr. Wilson. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Again, thank all 

of you for what you are doing. And, Mrs. Wheeler, as a National 

Guard family ourselves, I had the privilege and opportunity of conducting premobilization legal counseling armory to armory for 

about 25 years, and as I look back, we were helpful but gosh, what 

is being done now and your organization has helped make it so 

much more meaningful and the family members truly understand 

now that their husbands or wives could be deployed overseas, not 

just in my state for hurricane recovery and relief. So thank you for 

what you do. 

Another issue that I am concerned about, the widows tax, the 

SBP–DIC offset. I am really concerned that a lot of people in our 

country do not know about this, and so if you all could explain how 

this is such a problem because I know it is, and any way that you 

can help us on legislation that is pending would be helpful too. 
15 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Well, I think one of the major areas, as I mentioned before, retired service members choose to sign up for the 

survivor benefit plan and they pay a portion of their retired pay 

each month to provide for their spouse upon their death. So they 

have paid into that program. They may also be eligible because of 

wounds or conditions that they have because of their service. They 

may die from service-connected disabilities. Then their spouse 

would also be eligible for the dependency and indemnity compensation. Two different programs given for two different reasons. And 

that is why we believe it is unfair for the DIC to offset the SBP. 

Mr. WILSON. For many families we are talking about a thousand 

dollars a month? 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Yes. 

Mr. WILSON. And most Americans, you may be aware, are not at 

all aware, and people do understand what a thousand dollars 

means a month, particularly with children. So I hope you all keep 

raising the awareness so that good people like Susan Davis can 

make a difference. 

Also, another issue that I am concerned about is TRICARE. This 

is a terrific benefit for active duty, for Guard, and Reserve, but in 

some of the material that you all have provided to us you warn, 

which I think is correct, that this can be a hollow benefit and I am 

so concerned that be there are circumstances being created that 

can overwhelm the health care capabilities of our country. But on 

TRICARE in particular what recommendations do you have to 

make sure that this truly is a benefit that can be accessed by military families? 

Dr. COHOON. We have been watching the Medicare reimbursement rate cut closely. As you know the TRICARE is tied—the payment is tied to the Medicare reimbursement rate, and as it drops 

down 21.2 percent we have been hearing from some providers that 

we may actually see them decide not to take our population, and 

this is not really the best time for us to be losing providers especially in the mental health field. We are also looking at our 

TRICARE contractors may be changing and we are looking at two 

out of three may possibly change. Of that that means that 66 percent of our providers will be up for renegotiation as far as either 

deciding to sign on for TRICARE or not. 

So you add that, the reimbursement rate possible cuts, and then 

national health care reform on top. We are wondering if given the 

reimbursement rate for TRICARE, if the provider will stay on 

board or not, and if they won’t, especially in rural areas where 

there is a limited number of providers that are available to begin 

with, then you have a benefit, but then you are not able to access 

any doctors because they are not taking TRICARE. We hear on a 

regular basis that doctors are taking TRICARE, especially mental 

health, but when you call them they are no longer taking 

TRICARE patients. 

Mr. WILSON. And that is so crucial. I am the former president 

of the Mental Health Association; so this has been an issue that 

I care about and we have serious problems that need to be addressed. But we look forward to the suggestions that all of you 

have because I was struck by your comment of a hollow benefit. 

There are many people concerned about a free ticket, no show, that 
16 

you have a card but nowhere to go. And we should be working together on how this can be beneficial and particularly in Guard and 

Reserve in faraway places. 

People commute—it is not uncommon—200, 300 miles across 

state lines to come to armories. So we have got a challenge. And 

I look forward to working with the chairwoman on this. Thank you. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. I appreciate your raising 

that because I think we really do need to make certain that the 

providers are available and TRICARE has been actually recently 

successful in attracting physicians, but we remain concerned about 

that and the fact that I know that on a number of bases—I guess 

it is not necessarily just TRICARE—but where so many of the physicians are actually in theater who they had access prior to that 

and the community physicians have very much filled in a lot of 

those gaps. But you are suggesting that even though they may say 

they are taking patients, you are finding that that is not true. I 

think it would be interesting for us to know if you have some—I 

don’t know whether it is necessarily statistics or even anecdotal information about that, it would be helpful for us to know and to 

have an opportunity to follow up as well. I would like to have a 

better picture of that. 

Dr. COHOON. We have been using our Facebook as far as asking 

some information from those that have been following, especially 

with the Medicare cuts, are they hearing providers that are telling 

them that they are no longer going to be taking TRICARE? And I 

did ask the woman in our office, Bailey, that handles that, and we 

have pulled off some quotes as far as ‘‘this isn’t good, wonder how 

it will affect those of us as reservists.’’ ‘‘The civilian doctors don’t 

want to take TRICARE before the cuts. Now it is going to become 

a real problem in certain communities.’’ And another wrote, ‘‘so 

many sacrifices to ensure your family is being taken care of and 

now this.’’ So they—as I mentioned in our oral, there are—this has 

heightened our concern as far as access. We haven’t heard that providers are actually walking away, but we do hear that when our 

families do reach out that even though they are taking TRICARE 

patients, they are just full up, or if they go to the behavioral health 

provider list, the same thing as far as calling them and finding 

that they are just not available. 

Mrs. DAVIS. So it is compounded when there is a shortage of providers and then a concern, and I think we are all working to be 

sure that there are no cuts that the physicians will need to be anticipating; so that is something that we are working on. 

Dr. COHOON. And we are wanting to make sure that those that 

come back from theater have time to be able to regroup so that 

when they do come back to take care of us, they are able, they are 

full, 100 percent up and running so that they can take care of us. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

One of the issues I think you have raised with respite care, 

whether it is child care or it is respite care for a loved one who is 

caring for a wounded service member, as we look at limited budgets across the board, I am just wondering whether you are hopeful 

that we can allow for some reasonable respite care even though in 

many ways we haven’t answered the initial need for child care 
17 

itself or for care—for some compensation for those who are caring 

for a loved one. How did we try to balance those needs? 

Dr. COHOON. I will talk about the respite for the wounded and 

then I will have Kelly talk about respite as far as for the child care. 

In the National Defense Authorization Act, you included a service member compensation but there isn’t any added respite care 

that is in there. Others—there isn’t any training that is in there. 

And as we are looking at seamless transition of care, we want to 

make sure that whatever starts while they are active duty, as we 

call upstream, that it is smooth and runs into the VA. And the VA 

has some programs, aid and attendance, home health, those types 

of things, but our services are keeping our service members a lot 

longer than they ever did in the past. So by the time the service 

member transitions along with the caregiver there has been years 

sometimes as far as going on. 

So if the VA is going to set up some types of programs which the 

House and Senate have passed which include respite care, include 

training and include compensation, we would want to make sure 

that these benefits—the caregiver can start giving those benefits a 

lot earlier along, so that by the time they have reached the VA we 

are not looking at someone that has been totally burned out. Because they have walked away from their employment, a lot of 

them. If it is mom or dad they may not have health care. They may 

no longer have a job. That is why we have been advocating for that 

particular piece. We understand that there is limited resources as 

far as funding. We are talking a small population that really could 

benefit from these services and we really want to make sure that 

the benefits we put together are seamless and they start upstream 

where the caregiver actually is recognized and starts their job and 

continues on without any bumps in the system into the veteran 

status. 

And I will let Kelly talk about the child care. 

Ms. HRUSKA. There are several available programs for respite 

care for caregivers when a service member is deployed. There are 

Guard and Reserve programs and programs for active duty both on 

the installation and for those who are geographically dispersed. 

Those programs are run through the NACCRRA, the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies. In this 

year’s NDAA, Congress called for a study to see if the program is 

adequately funded and if it is being utilized. We are anxious to see 

the results of that study and whether or not we think it is important—— 

Mrs. DAVIS. Do you know when that is supposed to be available? 

Ms. HRUSKA. I know GAO is just starting it; so we are hoping 

for it by the end of the fiscal year. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. Do we need to push a little harder? 

Ms. HRUSKA. That would be helpful. We would appreciate that. 

But we are anxious to see the results of the study to make sure 

that families know about it, are they utilizing it, and if there is an 

increase necessary, where is it required? 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. Also, you mentioned, I think, Ms. 

Moakler, the summit on children’s issues in May, and I am wondering what you hope is going to come out of that summit. 
18 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Well, we hope to bring together great minds and 

come up with some action items that would pinpoint how we can 

take the programs we have and make them work better for both 

our caregivers and our children and also to see if we have missed 

any program. And we are going to have a two-day summit. 

First everyone is going to come together and come up with some 

action items. And then we are bringing more people in the second 

day to look at those and kind of kibitz and say, well, have you 

thought of this, have you thought of this, so that it is not just a 

one stop but that we pull as many folks as we can into the room 

to discuss this issue. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Is there anything about the RAND study that actually surprised any of you or that you felt really provided you with 

some additional information that you wouldn’t have had otherwise? 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Well, I think around the office we call it the 

‘‘duh’’ study. You know, it is something that we have all known 

through anecdotal evidence, but when we actually have the research to back it up that really helps us focus in on what needs 

to be done. 

Kelly, did you have something? 

Ms. HRUSKA. Well, as Kathy said, I just want to reiterate, I 

mean so many times we hear the anecdotal stories, and you asked 

us, well, how widespread is this? I think this gives us that statistical quantitative data to back up those anecdotal stories and that 

is very important. I think the longitudinal information is going to 

provide us much more information. And so we are anxious to share 

that with you when that becomes available. 

Mrs. WHEELER. One of the things I thought was striking was the 

fact that it is the total time of deployment, time apart during that 

period of time, and we are really looking at a three-year period of 

time. So our families are finding that the longer they are separated 

the more problems they are having. One of the other things I 

thought was fascinating was the reintegration piece for girls. Having raised a daughter myself and having had her father deployed, 

I think that was an interesting thing. 

So we have always been looking at deployment. Maybe we need 

to be spending a little more time on the reintegration, though we 

all know reintegration happens, before the reintegration happens, 

so making sure that the family understands what they might be 

moving towards, so giving them those types of support both before 

deployment and during deployment. That is what we are seeing 

with our Yellow Ribbon programs for our Guard and Reserve families, that that is helping them get ready, that they’re learning 

skills as they move along. 

Dr. COHOON. I would say looking at the fact that the caregivers— 

how their mental health is really affects the well-being of the whole 

entire family. And that brings us back to wanting to make sure 

that we really are assessing how our families are doing. You had 

asked me earlier as far as surveys, the Army, when I was over in 

Germany, they actually asked no matter what you are coming in 

for a series of questions to see really how you are doing. 

So it could be just as easy as that, that every time you have 

made a doctor’s appointment, we just ask how you are doing. 
19 

Mrs. DAVIS. One of the things that I picked up at a session recently with some of the wives, spouses of our SEALs, and Special 

Operations folks is that they had a lot of concern about additional 

help with homework and tutoring, and I was surprised. I was hearing that a lot. And I didn’t pick any of that up on surveys necessarily, that there is such a concern on the part of the member 

who is serving that the kids may not be getting as much help, and 

obviously if you have several children, it is very hard for mom or 

dad, even if it is a single dad to try to provide that. Do you know 

whether that might be part of the focus? And I would really be interested in knowing if there is anything that we could or should be 

doing. 

I understand that there is a network online for some homework 

assistance and help, and I think maybe some of our families are 

aware of that. It sounded to me that a lot of them are not. Is this 

an area that you have explored with families and is there anything 

we can do to help? 

Mrs. WHEELER. I would be happy to answer that. One of the interesting programs that has been out for a while is called 

Tutor.com, and it actually is now being offered to all military families, which is wonderful. It had started with the Army and now it 

is being available for our military families. It is a 24/7 program. All 

of the—actually the tutors are trained and have certain certification in order to do this. We see this as a couple wins. Not only 

is this helpful for families, helpful for the service member in alleviating that concern; it is also an opportunity for spouses to look 

at portable careers. So we see this as a double edge, being able to 

actually help take care of our own which is marvelous. But this is 

a great program that has been moving forward. There is another 

program called the Scholarships for Outstanding Airman to ROTC 

(SOAR) program, which is offered by Military Impacted Schools Association. It is an online program as well. It is excellent and very, 

very helpful to families. 

So there are resources out there. I think a lot of it is making certain that they know they are available. The Tutor.com is new to 

all military families, and we have certainly been publicizing that 

and will continue to do so. So has the Department of Defense. And 

that is being funded for all families by the Department of Defense. 

So it is a great step in the right direction. Thank you. 

Mrs. DAVIS. That is fine. Thank you. I appreciate that. And just 

finally, I think Secretary Gates has said that there is a process 

looking forward to Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, that military families 

would be consulted. How do you think that would be helpful and 

what role do you all see playing in that? 

Mrs. MOAKLER. Well, first, let me state that the National Military Family Association has no position on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, 

but we are pleased that the working group that Secretary Gates 

has appointed has been charged to look at the true views and attitudes of our service members and their families, and we are happy 

that they are going to look at both the policies that affect the service members and their families concerning eligibility for benefits 

and we hope that they will seek input from the broader military 

community, that they don’t just focus on the gay and lesbian community but that they look at families across the board and our as-
20 

sociation has long promoted the need for support of all families 

during deployments and we feel that there are some families that 

are not getting the resources they need because of fear of disclosure, and so they are having to suffer in silence. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. I appreciate that. 

Thank you all very much. We are so glad you are out there. You 

are making such a great contribution. I know the military families 

are pleased that they have such strong advocates and we certainly 

want to continue work with you in every way possible. So stay in 

touch and let us know when you have some areas where you think 

we should give additional time and attention. 

Thank you very much for being with us. 

[Whereupon, at 6:37 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 
A P P E N D I X 

MARCH 15, 2010 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

MARCH 15, 2010 

(25) 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 

Æ