Remarks Of U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy,
Introduction Of The National Guard Empowerment Act Of 2007, S. 430
January 30, 2007

Text of Legislation
Summary Of Legislation
Letter Of Support From The Adjutants General Associated Of The United States
Letter Of Support From The National Governors Association
Letter Of Support From The National Guard Associated Of the United States
Letter Of Support From The Enlisted Association Of The National Guard

Mr. President, today I introduce legislation about the National Guard with Senator Kit Bond, my fellow co-chair of the Senate’s National Guard Caucus, and Senator Ben Nelson, a longtime caucus member and a subcommittee chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  The National Guard Empowerment Act of 2007 would improve the management of the National Guard, and it will give the Guard more responsibility in improving our defense arrangements at home, where the Guard works in tandem with the nation’s governors to help keep our communities safe.  This legislation will strengthen the National Guard, the military, and our nation, and I believe it is something that deserves our attention and approval.

As Senators, we know all too well the many ways in which our communities rely on the National Guard.  The soldiers of the National Guard, like their active duty counterparts, have expended an extraordinary amount of will and sacrifice in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  The National Guard comprised almost fifty percent of the forces on the ground in Iraq less than two years ago, and now, as the Pentagon plans to implement the President’s plans for a troop escalation, the percentage of Guard troops on the ground is set to rise once again

At the same time, we are constantly witness to the equally heralded work that the National Guard has done to increase security at home.  Along with efforts to increase security along both the Northern and Southern Borders, the Guard has bolstered security at special events across the country, including the Olympics, the national political party conventions, and events here in our nation’s Capital.  Most importantly, the National Guard provided the best — the very best — response of any agency, Federal, State or local, in the disastrous aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, sending tens of thousands of troops to the hardest-hit communities in relatively short order.

When you look at these examples, it is indisputable that the National Guard is only limited in what it can do for us by the authorities, policies, available equipment, responsibilities, and support that we give them. 

It is time to give the Guard more tools and support to effectively carry out these responsibilities.

With the knowledge that the use of the National Guard is sure to increase in the future, the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs need unfettered and unmediated advice about how to utilize the force, whether balancing both the domestic and overseas missions of the National Guard or using the Guard to support of the nation’s governors in domestic emergencies.  Given this need for greater input on Guard matters, it is only logical that the leadership within the National Guard should be the ones doing the advising.  And, as the Guard becomes more active within the military’s Total Force, it only makes sense to increase the number of Guard generals at the highest reaches of the military command, where key force management decisions are made. 

At the same time, the National Guard is in a position to deal with some of the basic missions at home that are simply not being address by the Department of Defense.  We have some real heroes at the recently established Northern Command, which is working with various civilian agencies to prevent another attack at home.  Yet, the processes to deal with the mission of having military support of civilian authorities in domestic emergencies are as yet undefined. 

Northern command, meanwhile, is taking only perfunctory input from the nation’s governors who, along with local officials, will bear much of the responsibility in disaster situations.  Five years after September 11th, we cannot wait to give more definition to how the military will support civil authorities in an emergency, and we cannot wait until an actual emergency to inform state governors about what resources are available to them.  With some new authorities, we can give the Guard the mission of leading the effort to support civilian authorities at home and in working with the states and governors to plan for such disasters.

Elevating the National Guard bureaucratically, increasing the quality advice on the Guard to the senior command, and improving response to domestic emergencies are exactly what the provisions of the National Guard Empowerment Act will accomplish.

First, the National Guard Empowerment Act elevates the Chief of the National Guard Bureau from the rank of lieutenant general to general with four-stars, with a seat on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  This move will give the nation’s governors and adjutants general a straight line of communication to the Joint Chiefs Chairman, the Secretary of Defense, and the President.  Having personnel with more knowledge and experience with the Guard involved in key budget and policy deliberations, the branches of the active duty services will be less willing to try to balance budgets on the back of the reserve forces like the Guard, which only goes against our overall ability to respond.

Second, the Act gives the National Guard the responsibility of working with the states to identify gaps in their response capabilities, of setting equipment requirements, and procuring these much needed items.  The Act will ensure that a National Guard commander is the deputy commander of Northern Command and that the Guard—and thus, in turn, the governors—work in tandem with the command to set out specific plans to support our elected and civilian leaders in an emergency. 

Let me be clear about what this legislation does not do.  The Guard Empowerment Act does not make the National Guard a separate armed service.  The Guard will remain an integral partner of the Army and the Air Force.  Nor is the Act some kind of wanton power grab.  Instead, the Act would bring the National Guard’s bureaucratic position in line with what it is already doing and what we will expect of it in the future.  Passage of the Act will, utmost, not disturb or undermine our defense arrangements.  Rather, it will empower the entire military to deal with critically important problems that it is simply not addressing.

This legislation has been carefully crafted over the past year and half, and it incorporates the input we received from the adjutants general, the National Guard leadership, the governors, and key officers across the defense establishment.  I would like to submit for the record letters of support from the National Guard Association of the Untied States, the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, and the Adjutants General Association of the United States.

This drive to empower the Guard is also gaining momentum in Congress.  Since 9/11 we have been asking the Guard to do more and more, and they have superbly handled their dual role at home and abroad.  But strains are showing in the system.  The Guard is a 21st Century military organization that has to operate under a 20th Century bureaucracy.  The Guard’s ability to help the nation is limited only by the resources, authorities, and responsibility we give it.  Let us put the trust in the men and women of the Guard that they have deserved and earned, by giving them the seat at the table that they need.

# # # # #