OMS

Day 1,513, 17:51 • Published in USA USA • by XxBusinessMogulexX






PLEASE FILL UP THIS SURVEY REGARDING THE OMS, AFTER YOU READ THE ARTICLE:
http://www.kwiksurveys.com?s=OCDDNG_b538674d
THANKS!

Recently I became a member of the ST6 PR Corps and this is my first article that I write for them. To be exact there isn't much written by me. In this article you can find opinions from Animis(ST6 Member), Gnilraps(EZC Commander) and Maxx Johnson(ST6 Acting CO, XO of Operations) regarding the OMS(Office of Militia Support) and the budget. Some of you may close this article immediately after you see the length of this article. But the militias are funded from your money people. So I would like to hear some opinions regarding to this topic from you too.



CONTENTS:
Page 1: Gnilraps's opinion
Page 2: Maxx Johnson's opinion
Page 3: Animis's opinion & Extras



Gnilraps:



I like the current OMS funding system very much. It strikes a great balance between accountability and independence. Capping Militia funding at 100 was a stroke of genius on the part of SGTRock, and his oversight of OMS has been the best in my experience. He has been the least lenient, and thereby the most stewardly. If there were a government award for public service he deserves consideration.

I would like to see someone do some research into dollar/damage comparing OMS vs. USAF. I suspect that our OMS dollars are dealing better overall damage per dollar than our USAF dollars. It is only a guess on my part, but if we had a working API we could actually learn something useful. FIX THE GADDAM API, WHIG.

There is currently a movement afoot that is aimed at binding OMS funding to damage dealt. I think this is extremely unwise. Damage requirements are components we expect from Special Forces, Delta Force, and Government Military Units. Militias, by definition, provide benefits that are less measurable than battle damage. They provide a different kind of player-activity environment which appeals to eCitizens that the Government Military cannot reach.. As such, they MUST be able to follow a more independently devised set of requirements. Congress should be informed of each OMS-supported-MU's policies, and they should assess their effectiveness based on their being MILITIAS, not the Government Military. In other words, human nature dictates that player retention via Militias will look different than player retention via Government Military.

Militias ought to be judged on somewhat different measures than those used to judge the USAF.

What needs to be changed is more transparency with respect to how/where the OMS (and USAF) money is being spent. Since the money is coming from taxes, the ePublic has every right to know exactly where the dollars are being spent and what they are being spent on. Security is a non-issue in this respect. Our enemies gain nothing by knowing how and where we spend.



Maxx:




On the whole the OMS program is a huge success. From the standpoint of the militias it allows you to maintain a presence in the eUS and helps you make strides toward meeting your operating budget. From the standpoint of the eUS the program provides a large amount of influence to the country, at an extremely efficient rate from a cost perspective. It also helps to build activity and loyalty to the eUS within these communities.

The biggest problem facing the OMS program at this point lies in its administration and in its execution. The OMS fund is not currently being administered per the code that was written surrounding it, and this comes as a huge detriment to those groups who do follow the program as it is written and is intended.

The rules surrounding OMS are fairly clear cut and straight forward.

“In order to be eligible for funding, each armed forces entity must provide current (less than 1 week old) information on the following:

1. Listing of all communes the armed forces entity owns

2. A complete roster, including soldier name, strength and employment

3. Access to live orders

4. Establish daily orders that are consistent with the goals of the United States and the orders of the President.”

Unfortunately, we have two groups who do not follow requirement #4 unless that requirement happens to overlap with TERRA priority. We also have a group (which is also one of the above) that does not meet requirements #1 and #2 on a weekly basis. Despite this they are granted funding, and have been for months.

The OMS budget is currently used, in part, as a “slosh” fund for the Executive. In short it is being used to pay political bribes to gain favor with certain militias who are not based out of the eUS and who do not always fight in the interest of the eUS.

As such, they have been exempt from following the same rules the rest of the militias are required to follow, and cause the amount of funding that goes to other militias who actually do influence for the eUS to drop.

It is a shame, however, Congress has refused to step up and actually do their primary responsibility..... control the budget and tax dollars of the eUS by enforcing the code they wrote. Until this happens, OMS will continue to be a shell of what it was written into the Code as, and the members of Congress and the Executive who choose to allow this to continue get very little of my respect.



Animis:




After the eUSA was wiped last summer we rose up and took back our territories and wiped and took many of the territories formerly held by our attackers. With this came great expense and Congress developed a plan in August and September to build up the National Reserves to a level that was deemed sufficent. Obviously the exact number cannot be published.

Since that time the budget has included a fixed sum that goes into the reserves each week and while sums are expended from this money for large must win battles, for the most part, the plan is working well and the reserves plan is on target.

Our President Oblige requested more funds to pay the costs of MPPs, because there are more of them now which increased the budget a bit, but did not impact the reserves plan because MPPs are funded on their own Line Item, so they do not impact the daily limit of how much can be moved from the Country's Treasury.
Additionally, President Oblige backed a proposal that would reduce the Reserves Plan by about 1/3 of it's currently budgeted amount, still allowing for it to grow, in order to fund a increase to the Office of Militia Support (OMS) and to a lesser degree the United States Armed Forces (USAF).

This change in the Reserves funding has critics, including the Economics Council (EC), who seem to back the concept that any change in the plan poses risk and is unacceptable and that the plan must continue unhindered, without exception. Therefore they oppose any change in the budget regardless of demonstrated increases in costs and the need to address the increasing size of the Funded Military Entities considered to be Militias.

This brings us to the second set of Budget Considerations; The OMS funding levels and formulas used to both qualify and distribute funds to the Militia Groups who request and qualify for the funding provided through the OMS.
Currently, one of the Funded Militias (EZCo ) have experienced a marked increase in their membership as well as the battle activity and damage done by their members.

This shift represents players choosing to join these groups for a variety of reasons and has resulted in the OMS needing to be stretched further to pay for these additional members. Currently the funding is divided up between militias based on head counts with some funding caps in place because the OMS funding, which is the source of this Supplemental Money for the Militias, has not kept pace with the recent growth in the Militias.
Those who oppose the any change in the Reserve plan, oppose any increase in the funding to the USAF and OMS alike.

The second set of issues concerning the Budget and the Militias centers around the overall funding formula and structure of how the OMS operates.

Those who support change are looking at ways to use the funding provided to both create and incentive and a reward for greater military activity on the part of the Funded Militias, rather than a straight head count of communed membership, subject to the funding caps. The thinking seems to be the time tested tried and true model of capitalism; create an incentive to work harder and those who will benefit will work harder to get the incentive.

The other concern is a cause that one Congressperson seems to be unrelenting about; the funding through the OMS of a Militia that in not American in it's home base. This Congressperson seems to feel that this funding, should the President wish to continue it, should be managed directly by the President and the DoD rather than the President instructing the OMS to use OMS money to provide this military assistance to a militia that has between 20-30 eAmerican in it and has fought alongside of the eUSA, as a Terra Alliance member for several months. The Congressperson who opposes this does not oppose providing this militia with funding, but opposes it going unchecked and without any plan to eventually stop funding this "foreign" group. It may be significant to some readers to note that this non eUSA Militia receives over 15% of the entire OMS budget. The Congressperson who is spearheading the opposition to this claims that it "dilutes the funding available to the traditional eUSA Militias".

I want to hear from eUSA citizens: How do you feel about the eUSA funding a non eUSA group that fights for our Terra Alliance alongside of eUSA soldiers and Militia members?



Please fill up this survey regarding the OMS:
http://www.kwiksurveys.com?s=OCDDNG_b538674d
Links repaired, please fill it up now.
Thanks