Tracy and I were discussing my upcoming absence the other day and we came to the topic of finances.  Tracy asked me, "Are you going to have me do all the finances during the summer?"   "Uhhhhh, yeah." I said through gritted teeth knowing that this was probably the best thing to do, but having a hard time letting go of the reigns.    Letting go of the reigns is one of the keys to a successful deployment, but it does not make it any easier to do.   Theoretically, I could probably still control most of the finances will I am away and there are even soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan that have enough access to reliable internet access to do most of the bill paying themselves, but this runs contrary to what we are trying to accomplish.   The fact is that you do not know what your deployment situation is going to be like until you get boots on the ground and it is always subject to change.   What happens to the finances when military necessity keeps you from these duties?    What happens to the finances if something more tragic happens to you?  

With this being said,  I am turning over all of the finances to my wife and will keep in close touch about them when I am able to do so.   Right now all of my finances are handled by Microsoft Money and this program is on my laptop (the laptop goes with me!).   In fact, I am not sure that Tracy knows how to use this program.  One of the features that I have not used all that much is the Web accessible feature of Microsoft money that lets you do you work in the program, but then all of your information is downloaded to secure Microsoft servers that you can access and change through the web. This will allow Tracy and I to both make entries since we are spending money in two different places.   Most of my are bills are paid electronically already, and I am going to make one last sweep of bills to see if there is anything else I can make automatic. 

On the topic of banking, I want to recommend the best bank on the planet for soldiers: USAA.  I do not make any commission from this endorsement, so believe me when I say that this credit union for soldiers cannot be beat by any bank.   USAA is ran by mostly ex-soldiers (even the corporate big wigs) and they understand all of the issues involved with deployment!  The customer service is the best that I have ever encountered (the even address you by your rank), and you can talk to a real person any time that you want. The rates on their banking products demolish any of the "local" banks (most small banks are being swallowed up by the Chases of the world).  In case you are worried about not having a local branch to cash checks, you can deposit checks by your scanner and home computer!  In addition, they reimburse you for your ATM transactions at any ATM in the world since they do not have their own ATMs.  How many banks can say that?   USAA treats you right,  does not nickel and dime you to death and has competitive interest rates on loans and  investment products.  What is there not to like?

Another issue about deployment that is rarely talked about is what a family should do with the excess money that they receive during a deployment.  The news programs talk a lot about the soldiers that are hurt financially by deployment, but I would venture to say that there are actually more soldiers who will make more money on deployment than they would in their civilian jobs.  As a poor seminarian, this is certainly the case in my family.  You see a lot of soldiers come back with a nice little bank roll that they promptly use to but either a Harley-Davidson or a pick-up truck, but is this the best thing to do with your money?  Every family has to decide this for themselves, but as for my family, Tracy and I want to use this windfall to get more financially stable.  You can either use this money to buy a nice toy that depreciates quickly OR you can take the money that you make and invest it wisely in investment vehicles (like stocks,  money markets or real estate) that will make the time that you spend apart from your family more profitable and thus a bit easier to withstand.  Before I leave, Tracy and I are going to have to come up with a plan for how to handle this extra money.

I am going to have to continue this post is a second part because there is a A LOT more to cover.  I am going to spend the day trying to workout the above issues with the bill paying and financial software and then I will continue this post tomorrow with some more of the specifics that need to be taken care of before I leave for the summer...

My activities in the National Guard have, so far, revolved around working with Family Readiness Groups (FRGs) in the eight companies of my battalion.  I have traveled all over the state speaking to soldiers and families about the need to be prepared before going on a major deployment.  With just 4 weeks until I leave for an Army Chaplain School that last 3 months, I have to ask the readiness question of myself and my own family.   Tracy and the kids will be without me for 12 weeks which is exactly 11 weeks longer than they have ever done without me before.  12 weeks may not seems like a long time, but it has been shown that the hardest months, in general, for families of deployed soldiers is the first three months.  It is in the first three months that the all of the weaknesses in a family plan are revealed and after three months, families begin to adapt to their new situation.

As I go through the process of getting my family ready for my absence, I am going to use the following principles to guide me.

1.  I am working towards a "steady-state" of readiness.

By this I mean that I should be deployable within 48 hours at all times, not just when I have a year notice of an impending deployment. The call up for Katrina was only a 48 hour notice and there are many scenarios that would have similar time tables.

2.  Readiness for deployment is also readiness for any unexpected crisis.

Natural disasters, economic disasters, and personal disasters (such as the death of Tracy or I) put an incredible strain on a family and any weaknesses in your family plan will be immediately felt.  If you have your basic needs covered and contingencies for various emergencies, then you can react quicker and focus more on the emotional issues of crisis. 

3.  My whole family needs to be involved in this project.

Involving Tracy and the kids give them some investiture in my deployment and in ensuring their own care.  The main point of the Family Readiness Group is not to take care of all the soldiers directly, but primarily to enable families to be more self-sufficient.  Everyone needs help sometimes, but the more self-reliant that you are, the more that you can help other families.

Involving the whole family also helps me identify areas of need that I might otherwise take for granted.  I don't think twice about what to do if the car gets a flat tire,  but Danni's course of action is to call me.  What if I am not around? Does Tracy know how to change the furnace filter or jump the car when the lights are left on all day? 

4.  Readiness is comprehensive and includes the spiritual and emotional as well as the physical.

If your busy life has led you to push aside the basic spiritual and emotional needs of your family, then when the rubber hits the road and you have to scoot, then there is no time to cram all of that support, teaching and love into a short period of time.  If Dad has not discipled his children, then someone else will end up doing it in your absence.  Do you have teenagers?  Then your teenager can find LOTS of willing guidance (or misguidance) from their peers. 

 

Keep checking back in the next 4 weeks to see the process that I go through and use my experience to help guide your own efforts to prepare your family!

As the Democratic primary grinds along, both candidates are searching desperately for way in which to differentiate themselves and ingratiate themselves to "the middle class"  (almost all Americans view themselves as middle class regardless of income level).  The hot topic for this week is BIG OIL and how they are gouging the American people with high gas prices.   I would ask the reader to stop and think a moment about whether or not the Democrats are sincerely opposed to high gas prices.  I would propose that high gasoline prices dovetail nicely into the Democratic platform and they have no interest, outside of political pandering, to return to sub-three dollar a gallon levels.

The economic reality of high fossil fuel cost is that oil that is over 100 dollars a barrel, high natural gas prices and the regulation nightmare of new coal plants makes alternative sources of energy like solar, wind, and even nuclear power, more economically viable.  If the American people have gasoline that is cheap and plentiful, we will never purchase alternative fuel vehicles and if our heating oil prices are low we will never put solar panels on our roofs.  Is this right or wrong?  Right and wrong is not relevant to this discussion, we are talking about economic self-interest and appeals to "save the planet" hold little weight outside of those with plenty of disposable income to spend on their moral stance on the environment.  Jimmy Carter found this out when he asked the American people to drive 55 and turn down their thermostats.  People may say that we have changed as a people, but it was not too long ago (4 years) that American vehicles grew to their largest size ever in the form of SUVs.

It is the Democratic party who has consistently put out the propaganda over the years that "In Europe they pay much more for gasoline than we do."  They say this as if Americans will be swayed by the personal and national habits of the French.  If I were to tell my wife that it was OK to have an affair because that is what the French do,  how far do you think I will get with that reasoning?  It is the Democratic party that has often proposed dramatic taxes imposed upon gasoline for the express purpose of weaning our country off of fossil fuels.  It is Al Gore that is jetting around the world spreading the gospel of global warming and impending disaster.  It is the Democratic party that has urged the signing of the Kyoto accord (the treaty that would limit the U.S. Carbon emissions, but allow China and India to "catch up").  It is the Democratic party that has done all that it could do to limit the drilling for local sources of oil.

My point in this blog is not to argue one way or the other about the merits of alternative fuels.  My point is that the Democratic party is painting the BIG OIL companies as the villain in this drama and have proposed to penalize an American company because they have made too much money from a situation that the Democrats themselves have had a hand in engineering and have an investiture in continuing.  The Democrats want to impose windfall profit taxes on our oil companies when it is the gargantuan oil companies that are owned by Sovereign states such as Russia and Venezuela that are reaping most of the rewards of this spike in oil prices.  I want the Democrats to confess to the American people that they are filled with glee (yes, little school girl GLEE) at the spike in gasoline prices and believe that it is the only way to get out of our SUVs. 

Do you really want to offset the prices of high oil prices?  Go invest in some oil company stocks!  I have had a 30% return on my oil investments in just the last 2 months (realized gains!) There are a ton a smaller oil companies that are focusing on finding resources of oil here in the United States (like the Bakken Oil deposit) and there is money to be made.  Perhaps I should have those profits taken away from me by the government in the form of "He does not know how to judge his own economic benefit" taxes or perhaps they could impose "you should be more like Ed Begley Jr. taxes"  Fortunately I have the ever important "drove a Festiva for 3 years exemption"

 During the 1992 primary race, Bill Clinton met me in an awkward manner. The account of this encounter can be found here.  On Thursday,  Hillary Clinton was campaigning in Southern Indiana and spoke at a Jeffersonville High School.  Someone from the campaign called the school district and asked for a couple of sign language interpreters and my wife and her friend Katie Paris jumped at the chance.  Tracy called me liked a 14 year old who just got her first kiss and could hardly contain her excitement.  We tried to discuss some likely political phrases that would be used but Tracy and Katie were too worked up to listen closely.

When they arrived at the event, the Secret Service (or the social security men, as Katie kept referring to them) did a back ground check on both of them.  Tracy and Katie, who apparently do not understand the seriousness of Secret Service activities, began joking with the agents saying, "Its OK, I am a pastor's wife" and Katie said, "Its OK, I live with my mother."  Tracy continued to say about Katie "She is such a nice girl, she used to cut the grass" in the same manner that people respond when interviewed about the serial killer that used to live next door.  I can only imagine what the Secret Service thought of that encounter with my wife.

Apparently the background check turned out OK (which is good to know.  I never ran one on her before we married) and they set them up off to the side of the stage.  The Secret Service told them that only one of them would be able to be in the stage area and Tracy quickly informed them that she and Katie had to switch off every 20 minutes and that the Secret Service would have to make provision for this.  Yes,  my wife started started to direct the Secret Service in their duties.  The agents relented and got them set up to interpret.  My wife is really something else...

The stump speech was fairly standard and filled with the requisite amount of pandering so Tracy was well prepared to interpret Senator Clinton's phraseology.  Watching Morning Joe every day with me and taking a Government class (with lots of current events discussions) has done her a lot of good.  In just the last year, Tracy has come a long way towards being keyed into politics and this just goes to show you kids out there that those classes that you think you will never use come in handy when you least expect it. 

One of the campaign workers asked Tracy if she would be voting for Senator Clinton and she responded with an immediate "No."  At this point the worker asked if she was voting for Obama, and again she says, "No" but she added that she wants Hillary to win the primary!  The campaign probably will not be asking for her services again.  My friend Kevin wanted to know if it was difficult interpreting under "sniper fire" and I am sure that if anyone could do that, my wife could.