I read the article and nowhere does it say that the previous employer did not hold his job open for him while he served. Maybe he did not want the similar job the employer offered him upon return?
If anything, the extra combat pay (and this mortgage cap of 6%) helped him kick the can further along. Perhaps he’s no longer a reservist, hence his lower income.

Sounds to me like this article is using the flag and patriotism to make the story more emotionally appealing. Powayseller who is normally so sharp feel right into the trap. The article is about ARM more that it is about the plight of the military.

Here’s the quote from the article.

” That’s exactly what happened to the Howells. In November 2004, Howell, a 36-year-old National Guardsman, was deployed to Iraq. While he was away, the combat pay helped to offset the monthly mortgage payments as they began to creep up. In addition, under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, his mortgage rate was capped at 6 percent as long as he was in active military service. But when he finished his tour in Iraq this January, the cap no longer applied and he stopped getting combat pay. Worse, while he was gone, someone had filled his old job. He found work as a stable manager for a nearby horse farm, and as a law enforcement dispatcher for the state’s Department of Fish & Wildlife; but, even with the two jobs, he was earning about one-third less than he had in 2004. Meanwhile, the interest rate on the couple’s largest mortgage climbed to 9.9 percent. ”