Bill Overview
Title: BAH Restoration Act
Description: This bill increases the monthly amount of the basic housing allowance for members of the uniformed services inside the United States. Specifically, the monthly amount of allowance for a member must be the amount of the monthly cost of adequate housing in the area, as determined by the Department of Defense, for members of the uniformed services serving in the same pay grade and same dependency status as the member.
Sponsors: Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the uniformed services in the United States
Estimated Size: 1380000
- The bill impacts members of the uniformed services within the United States.
- The basic housing allowance is specific to service members and correlates with housing costs in their respective areas.
- The Department of Defense has data indicating the number of service members eligible for the housing allowance.
Reasoning
- Given the policy, the primary beneficiaries will be members of the uniformed services in the U.S., which includes various branches and their personnel.
- The policy's impact might vary based on the cost of living in different areas and the personal circumstances of service members, such as rank and family size.
- The simulations should include a range of service members from different regions, ranks, and family circumstances to understand the policy's varied effects.
- The financial constraints indicate the policy cannot meet every single service member's needs entirely, but it aims to alleviate the housing burden for a significant number.
Simulated Interviews
Navy Officer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased housing allowance is much needed in high-cost areas like San Diego.
- It will help ease financial stress as housing costs have been outpacing pay increases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Marine Corps Corporal (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increases in the BAH will make a significant difference given my lower rank and single income situation.
- The policy should have been updated alongside rising rental costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Army Sergeant (Fayetteville, NC)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The BAH increase is beneficial but needs to keep pace with local rent hikes.
- Half-time custody means calculating housing costs over two homes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Coast Guard Petty Officer (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Alaska has a unique real estate market; however, the BAH adjustment helps manage variable costs.
- The policy is a step in the right direction towards supporting military families' financial stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Air Force Colonel (Birmingham, AL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone near retirement, changes in BAH will not significantly affect me compared to junior members.
- Budget adjustments now may set a precedent for future policy changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public Health Service Officer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- In L.A., every bit of extra BAH will help with daunting rental prices.
- The policy needs to be dynamic to reflect rapid cost of living increases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Space Force Specialist (Austin, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Starting a family, so the allowance helps with budgeting our growing household needs.
- It's promising to see attention to housing costs as part of service life reforms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired Coast Guard (Seattle, WA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see potential benefits for my former colleagues, though it doesn't apply to retirees.
- Current and future personnel will greatly appreciate responsive housing policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Air Force Airman (Colorado Springs, CO)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Entering the service with a realistic housing allowance is encouraging.
- Supports overall morale among new recruits looking at long-term service.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Navy Chief Petty Officer (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- BAH increases can influence house market dynamics, beneficial for future resale.
- It maintains necessary access to housing given the high cost of living in Hawaii.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4200000000 (Low: $3360000000, High: $5040000000)
Year 2: $4410000000 (Low: $3530000000, High: $5290000000)
Year 3: $4630500000 (Low: $3706500000, High: $5554500000)
Year 5: $5093550000 (Low: $4074840000, High: $6112260000)
Year 10: $6218480000 (Low: $4974784000, High: $7465976000)
Year 100: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Key Considerations
- The BAH increase will directly benefit approximately 1.4 million service members and their families.
- Fundamental to assessing true costs is understanding geographic variance in housing costs and dependency ratios.
- Potential inflationary pressures on housing markets in densely populated or highly desired regions may occur.
- The legislative update will need to consider regional variance in living costs and ensure accurate data from the DOD.
- Possible positive outcomes include improved housing stability and retention in the armed forces.