Hill’s National Guard Advocates
Hold News Conference
To Protest DOD Bill’s Proposed Decisions On National Guard
. . .’Empowerment’ Steps Likely
To Be Dropped, While Provision Threatening State Control Likely To
Be Added
WASHINGTON (Sept. 19) – Congressional leaders heading the fight for
National Guard empowerment Tuesday expressed grave disappointment
over
the House and Senate conference agreement on the Fiscal Year
2007 Defense Authorization Bill for abandoning the National Guard
“empowerment” thrust of the Senate’s version of the bill. The
conference report is also likely to take a sizable step toward
weakening states’ authority over their Guard units, according to the
congressional leaders who are leading the fight for Guard
empowerment.
Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) – the co-chairs
of the Senate’s National Guard Caucus – said the conference
agreement is expected to include a provision making it easier for
the President to declare martial law, stripping state governors of
part of their authority over state National Guard units in domestic
emergencies. The provision is opposed by the National Governors
Association and by key leaders in both the House and Senate. The
conference report is also expected to drop a Senate-adopted
provision authored by Bond and Leahy to elevate the status of the
National Guard within the Pentagon.
During committee deliberations thus far, negotiators from the House
and Senate Armed Services Committees have dropped a Senate-adopted
version of the National Defense Enhancement and National Guard
Empowerment Act of 2006, a bill first introduced in the Senate in
March by Bond and Leahy. The legislation, which was added as an
amendment to the Authorization Bill, would codify the National
Guard’s prominent role in the nation’s defense since the September
11th attacks. The legislation, which flowed from several
major reports on the National Guard and homeland security, would
have elevated the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to rank of full
General with four-stars, while ensuring that the Deputy Commander of
the United States Northern Command would come from the ranks of the
National Guard.
Also expected to be included in the conference report is a widely
opposed provision to allow the President more control over the
National Guard. The conference committee has made changes the
Insurrection Act, which governs when the President can call to
action the National Guard without the consent of state governors to
restore public order. Under the changes, the President would now be
able to invoke the Act during such regular occurring events as a
natural disaster. Because posse comitatus restrictions that
prevent the military’s involvement in law enforcement do not apply
when the Insurrection Act is invoked, the changes would nullify
these long-standing laws.
“This would be a one-two punch against Guard empowerment that runs
counter to the Guard’s needs and the Guard’s crucial missions,” said
Leahy. “We can deal with a range of situations at home if the
people and resources of the National Guard remain regularly under
the control of the officials who are closest to managing these
situations. At the same time, the Guard also needs more
institutional muscle to ensure it has the equipment and authorities
it needs to carry out its dual-missions. As it stands, this defense
bill would go in exactly the wrong direction.”
Bond added, “Whenever the nation has called
upon the National Guard for support, both at home and abroad, the
Guard has responded in exemplary fashion. The Guard has earned a
promotion and the enhanced authority necessary to be in the huddle
of the Pentagon's senior defense team. Unfortunately that is not
presently the case which is why the legislation we are discussing is
so vital to national security and the ability of the Guard to
promote and protect its key policy provisions and requirements.”
# # # # #
Remarks Of U.S. Senator Patrick
Leahy,
Co-Chair, Senate National Guard Caucus
News Conference On The National Guard Empowerment Act
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Thank you,
General Koper, General Taylor and General Conaway. I appreciate
your joining us today. This petition is so impressive. It speaks
directly to strong desire of our men and women in the National Guard
for a more substantial voice at the highest levels of the Defense
Department. It is also makes clear to those of us on Capitol Hill
that the men and women of the National Guard have expectations for
us, just as we always expect great things from them.
The National
Guard has delivered for America, over and over again. The National
Guard has played a crucial role in our national defense at home and
abroad. At the high-water mark, the Guard made up almost 40 percent
of the troops on the ground in Iraq. Here at home, the Guard is
being routinely called up to support such diverse missions as
airport and border security and, of course, disaster relief.
Regrettably, we
are here because Congress at this critical moment is on the verge of
an outright failure in supporting the National Guard. Reports
continue to trickle out of the conference on the Defense
Authorization Bill that House and Senate leaders plan to drop a
slimmed-down version of our National Guard Empowerment Act, which
will give the Guard more of a voice in the upper reaches of the
Pentagon.
Compounding this
setback, we also hear that the conferees are ready to adopt changes
to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any
future President to use the military to restore domestic order
WITHOUT the consent of the nation’s governors. To put it another
way, the Defense Authorization Bill will actually encourage the
President to declare federal martial law – something has been done
in only three — three — occasions over the past several
decades.
From coast to
coast, the members and leaders of the National Guard are alarmed and
puzzled by these setbacks, and Senator Bond and I could not agree
with them more. The Guard empowerment thrust of this year’s Defense
Authorization Bill in the Senate was a long-awaited reform that
would help ensure that the Guard has the bureaucratic muscle to
match its needs in fulfilling the lengthening list of missions we
are asking the Guard to perform. Our Guard Empowerment initiative
would clear away some of those bureaucratic cobwebs, to help take
advantage of the Guard’s ability to respond to emergencies at home
quickly. We must end this troubling pattern that the active duty
forces continually raid high-priority National Guard programs and
personnel accounts to pay their own bills. We saw that troubling
pattern in action late last year, when the Army and the Air Force
tried to cut the end-strength of the National Guard by upward of
17,000 and 14,000, respectively. With more than 70 senators joining
us, Senator Bond and I helped block that decision, but that episode
dramatically showed how the Guard often gets the short end of the
stick in key budget and policy deliberations.
At the same time,
we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare
martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military
for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central
tenets of our democracy. It creates needless tension among the
various levels of government – one can easily envision governors and
mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over
their shoulders while someone who has never visited their
communities gives the orders.
A bill that began
with such promise in empowering the National Guard now increasingly
appears to be shaping up as a double setback for the Guard. That is
inexplicable, that is indefensible, and that is wrong. The last
thing Congress should be doing is making the National Guard’s job
more difficult. We urge the Defense Bill conferees to adopt the
Empowerment Bill and drop the ill-advised changes to the
Insurrection Act.
The Guard is
always there for America. Now the ball is in Congress’s court, and
we cannot afford to let our Guard down.
Thank you.
# # # # #
