soon people will rise up against obama-reid and peloski. The thugs will be scratching there heads as Government give them what they deserve. Thats nothing , nudaw, $00000000. Let them starve and steal the thugs money just like they have done to the policeman, firemen, and all middle class hardworking citizens.

the Administration has done enough real crap to the country without us dreaming up utter bullhockey.

Benefits are not being cut. The budget number for the compensation pool is being cut.

By law, each fallen police officer’s estate is entitled, key word there, to $300K. It doesn’t matter how much is budgeted. If the program goes over budget, money has to be found to fund it. Again this is why programs like this are called entitlement programs.

As to projecting police deaths, I find not evidence that the actuarial work done by DoJ is less accurate than that done by Concerns of Police Survivors, but based on last year’s data the fund paid out $40 million to the survivors of 134 police officers. Funding it at $60 million, a 50% increase over the pay outs from last year, doesn’t seem unreasonable.

Look, I like my red meat as well as the next guy. And I’ll accept back seat to no one in my loathing of this administration, but I refuse to beclown myself in the process.

…the grammatical error in the title of the post renders it incorrect & misleading.

“Obama to Cut Slain Officer’s Benefits in Half” means that a particular slain officer’s benefits have been cut. This is clearly not the case.

“Obama to Cut Slain Officers’ Benefits in Half” would be more correct, but still misleading. As Streiff has pointed out, it’s the budget that has been cut. That’s an administrator’s prerogative. Nobody has cut any actual benefits, nor can they.

A more accurate headline might be: “Budget for Slain Officers’ Benefits Slashed; Where’s the Outrage?” Admittedly less punchy, but more aligned with the point you’re trying to make.

in 1988, leaving behind my mom, a home maker at the time, to take care of me and my brother (who were 8 and 4 respectively), without a father and without our primary source of income. Getting life back to normal after his death was not easy.

Programs like this one help families get back on their feet and survive after their officer has died in the line of duty, ie, protecting us. I’m a budget hawk but this, like the military and veterans programs, is one area where I don’t mind my tax dollars going. These people keep us safe and put their lives in harm’s way every single day. The least we can do is make sure we take care of them.

It makes me extremely angry that the president can find (or more accurately borrow foreign) money and mortgage our childrens’ futures and dole it out to idiotic things like funding for abortions overseas, but wants to cut money going to people who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of the rest of us.

the family of an officer/NRA Member killed in the line of duty.

This is a man who is friends with domestic terrorist cop killers. If he or Holder have the nerve to address the assembled police detail in front of the Capitol at the annual Police Memorial on May 15th, the assembled officers should do an about face and give him their backs during his speech.

and they are fairly exclusively against Obama. At least here in Phoenix. They are almost exclusively against the media too.

I do not foresee any outrage over the media duplicity and cheer leading of the Obama but I expect a considerable vocalization of the program cuts. This will, I suspect will account for nothing in the scheme of things.

What is needed is to cut the lifetime pay of congress after they have been voted out. Bring back their ‘civic duty’ instead of money incentive similar to BO’s reasoning for cutting the charity tax deduction – if they are truly charitable, they don’t need money incentives. They should have announced this kind of cut first before the officers since BO is supposedly after the rich high paid individuals.

What the hell is the federal government doing providing death benefits to police officers who work for somebody other than the federal government. If that’s an important and desirable thing then let the jurisdictions they work for provide the benefit either directly or through insurance.