Governors Oppose Federal Control of Guard

[cal04]

The nation's governors, protesting what they call an unprecedented shift in authority from the states to the federal government, will urge Congress today to block legislation that would allow the president to take control of National Guard forces in the event of a natural disaster or a threat to homeland security.

In a sharply worded letter that will be transmitted to Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress this morning, the governors ask that a House-Senate conference committee remove a provision included in the House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act giving the president such authority.

"This provision was drafted without consultation or input from governors and represents an unprecedented shift in authority from governors as commanders and chief of the Guard to the federal government," the governors state in the letter.

As of yesterday, 51 governors, including some from U.S. territories, had signed the letter, a sign of broad bipartisan support that underscores the depth of opposition among state executives to encroachments by Washington on their powers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/13/AR2006081300606.html

[babylonsister]

1. Phew! But can they be overruled by the asshats in charge? nt

[madrchsod]

2. what ever happened to the republicans mantra of states rights?

i guess that`s not on the neocon or neoliberal agenda

[Parisle]

3. "Over-ruled?"

--------Yeah,..... let 'em try to over-rule regular Americans with M-16's. National Guardsmen aren't stupid or blind; they see what's been going on.

[WePurrsevere]

4. Good for them! Wonder who hasn't signed it yet and why not. n/t

[JanusAscending]

8. Uh.............there are only 50 States, and Puerto Rico is a

commonwealth, that's 51! How many other commonwealths do we have? Guam, and who else? It seems like the Majority have signed it already? No?

[WePurrsevere]

10. The majority yes, but other then Puerto Rico I must admit I wasn't sure

who our "commonwealths" are or if we had more that I wasn't aware of. :blush:

(and although I may have forgotten/lost track of a few things over the years, how many "states" we have isn't one of them... yet. ;) )

[cal04]

5. The Letter

Dear Mr. Chairman and Representative Skelton:
We write in opposition to a provision in the House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization (DoD) Act (H.R. 5122), which is about to be conferenced with the Senate-passed version, S. 2766. A provision in section 511 of the House-passed DoD Act would allow the President to federalize the National Guard of the states without the consent of the governor. Specifically, this clause amends Title 10 of the United States Code to give the President the authority to take control of the Guard in case of "a serious natural or manmade disaster, accident, or catastrophe that occurs in the United States, its territories and possessions, or Puerto Rico."

This provision is very open-ended without a definition of what constitutes a "serious" natural or manmade disaster. We understand that in case of a National Security incident where the state may have been incapacitated by an event, the President may need this power. However, he is granted this authority under the "insurrection act."

The possibility of the federal government pre-empting the authority of the state or governor in natural and manmade disasters is opposed by the nation's governors. We are responsible for the safety and welfare of our citizens and are in the best position to coordinate all resources to prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters. When federal aid is needed it should be coordinated by the governors.

The nation's governors feel very strongly about protecting our constitutional responsibility to take care of our citizens, and do not want that responsibility shifted to federal officials, as defined by a "serious" emergency. The current process works quite well where we use our National Guard in emergencies and ask for federal assistance as the need arises.

We urge you to drop this provision that would usurp governor's authority over the National Guard during emergencies from the conference agreement on the National Defense Authorization.

Sincerely,
Governor Mike Huckabee
Governor Janet Napolitano

http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.cb6e7818b34088d18a278110501010a0/?vgnextoid=7a62d3164d5cc010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD

[lumpy]

6. The power grabbing fascists in our WH

must be stopped. Another step in the attempt to concentrate power centered around the presidency. This sort of action can lead to a dictatorial government.

[Raydawg1234]

7. What the fuck happened to Republicans being for states rights?

[Stargazer99]

9. Make you think Republicans are liars

It is rather self-evident...and still the Bushbots support this dictorial regime.

[Stinky The Clown]

11. You know ...... this could have some serious legs and get us back to

a debate that started a while ago. Possee Commitatus (sp?). If the feds nationalize/federalize the Guard, does that make them eregular army and as such forbidden from operating on US soil?

Not a posit ... just an "I wonder".