This article, by Edward Colimore, was originally published in The Philadelphia Inquirer, July 21, 2008
Army Spec. Joe Fabozzi thought he was getting out of the New Jersey National Guard in December 2003. He wound up dodging bullets and mortar shells in Iraq four months beyond his enlistment.
Army Spec. Garett Reppenhagen expected to leave Iraq in October 2004. New orders kept him there nearly 10 more months.
And Army Sgt. Robert Reichner hoped to leave Kosovo in June 2004 to restart his civilian life. He was sent to Guantanamo Bay for another year of duty.
The three were among about 60,000 service members who have been held over during the past four years by the Pentagon's controversial "stop-loss" policy. The measure involuntarily extends military service beyond the end of the enlistment period.
More than 12,000 soldiers - including nearly 4,000 Guard members - were under stop-loss orders in May, compared to about 8,500 about the same time last year. And many have objected strongly to the months of extra duty, often in combat zones.
A bill now in Congress would pay them an additional $1,500 a month of extended duty. The measure, introduced by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.), also would make payments retroactive to October 2001, covering servicemen and women affected by stop-loss since the start of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is being considered by committees in both houses.
The pay "would make me feel good, that my service had been acknowledged," said Fabozzi, 29, a Waretown, Ocean County, resident and air-traffic controller at Northeast Philadelphia Airport.
"Getting the $1,500 is great, but given the choice of getting the $1,500 or going home, I would have gone home," he said.
Soldiers have not had that choice - and eight of them challenged the stop-loss policy in federal court in Washington, D.C., four years ago. The case was dismissed.
"The stop-loss policy is unfair, a violation of the basic principle of contracts," said the soldiers' attorney, Jules Lobel, a University of Pittsburgh professor and vice president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a public-interest group in New York. "People should serve their time, and that should be it."
Lautenberg's legislation - sponsored on the House side by U.S. Rep. Betty Sutton (D., Ohio) - does not address the merits of the policy. It seeks only to provide extra pay to soldiers.
"The military made a deal with our men and women in uniform, and if our troops are forced to serve and sacrifice longer than that commitment, that sacrifice should be rewarded," said Lautenberg, whose measure is cosponsored by Democratic Sens. Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.
The proposed stop-loss pay comes as many troops are reenlisting. More than 1,200 troops serving in Iraq signed up for extended service and were sworn in in Baghdad on Independence Day in one of the largest such ceremonies ever, officials said.
Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq, said he was "proud of their decision to re-enlist and help the people of Iraq win their most important battle . . . freedom."
Many soldiers affected by stop-loss, though, have felt betrayed, "like everything we stand for in this country was getting violated every step of the way," said Fabozzi, who would be eligible for at least $6,000 under the proposed measure.
"Giving us money now and still forcing soldiers to stay is like [federal officials] admitting they were wrong."
The additional money, however, "would help right now," said Reppenhagen, 33, a Colorado Springs, Colo., resident who was an infantry sniper in Iraq and hopes to become a high-school history teacher.
"It would have helped more [in Iraq], so I wouldn't have had the feeling like I was being used and abused by the military," he said.
The pay - Reppenhagen would be eligible for up to $15,000 - "will help increase the morale of troops who are suffering with stop-loss," he said.
The policy "has been used as a buffer" because of the lack of troops, he added. "Soldiers are being worked to the bone and abused by the stop-loss process."
Some of the troops say they believe the proposed pay increase may discourage political and military leaders from extending service because of the cost. Lautenberg is awaiting estimates - expected to be available within a week from the Congressional Budget Office - that would show how much the bill would cost.
On the House side, the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee recommended monthly stop-loss bonuses of $500 to $1,500. That action would cost $73 million to $220 million, according to an estimate published in the Congressional Quarterly.
"It will let them know there will be a price to pay," said Reichner, 32, who was mobilized and discharged through Fort Dix and stands to receive $18,000 if the stop-loss bill becomes law."
A soldier is no longer a volunteer after serving the time of enlistment, said Reichner, a Kalamazoo, Mich., resident and graduate student who hopes to become a program analyst in the Defense Department.
"He's not under a contract anymore," he said. "It's the same concept as overtime. If a boss asks you to work overtime and doesn't want to pay overtime, do you want to work?"
The "overtime" in the legislation would be welcome to many soldiers whose families are going through tough financial times, said Marine Chris Bertone, who served during the Iraq invasion in 2003 and in Afghanistan in 2004.
The 24-year-old Bloomfield, N.J., resident was involuntarily recalled several months ago as he was about to enter a police department boot camp in Essex County, New Jersey. His service has been temporarily delayed by "paperwork problems."
"But I expect to head back to Iraq," he said. "I think [the stop-loss money] is an excellent idea."
Though also in favor of the additional pay, Kristopher Goldsmith said he would much rather see stop-loss ended. The policy, he said, nearly ended his life.
A former Army sergeant, the Long Island, N.Y., resident served in Iraq in 2005, returned home, and was called up again - under a stop-loss order - to be part of the troop surge last year.
"Instead of being a civilian again and starting my life, I was doing the polar opposite: putting on a uniform and returning to Iraq," said Goldsmith, a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, an antiwar group with 47 chapters across the country.
"I had come back with pretty severe PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder] and depression and was having panic attacks."
He said he attempted suicide on Memorial Day last year and received a general discharge.
Such stories leave former soldiers such as Steve Mortillo, 25, of West Philadelphia, unimpressed by the extra money being sought for the troops.
"I'm glad people realize the situation soldiers are in," said Mortillo, an Army specialist who served in Iraq from 2004 to 2005 and is president of the Philadelphia chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War, which has 1,200 members.
The extra pay "is better than nothing, but it doesn't address the larger issue."
