Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
National Journal's CongressDailyPM
February 7, 2008 The Commission on the National Guard and Reserves today defended a controversial recommendation in its recently released report that suggests placing active-duty military units under the operational control of governors during state emergencies. During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Commission Chairman Arnold Punaro and other commission members argued that the recommendation, which has been strongly opposed by Pentagon officials, would streamline the chain of command and improve disaster response.
In most cases, active-duty forces under the president's command can supplement state-run National Guard units for only a brief period of time, said retired Maj. Gen. Gordon Stump, a member of the commission and the former adjutant general of Michigan. For "unity of command purposes," Stump said, those active-duty units should temporarily fall under the control of the governor in many cases. "Every single response that we have is going to start with the National Guard," Stump said. "It doesn't matter what the government or anybody says -- that's just the way it is."
The commission's report "hit a small volcano" in the Pentagon over the recommendation on operational control, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., former committee chairman, said during the hearing. Indeed, Pentagon officials have argued that the recommendation, which they fear would take authority away from the federal government, is unconstitutional.
"The proposal of the Punaro commission is simply at odds with the theory of a federal system of government. It is at odds with Article II of the Constitution," Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs, said last week. "There can be only one commander in chief, and that is the president of the United States. To decentralize that command and control to 50 separate state governors invites confusion."
The recommendation did not draw any immediate support from members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, although Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs ranking member Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the commission was "right on the money" in its attempts to create a unity of command during disasters. "I'm not sure I agree with the proposed solution of bringing those troops under the control of the governor, but certainly you've identified a very real problem," she added. The lack of a unified command in charge of all military forces, Collins noted, hindered the response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
Warner likewise said the government needs to bring "total clarity" to the issue of chains of command during domestic emergencies. There must be a "clear, predetermined, established" chain of command, Warner added.
--Megan Scully
February 7, 2008 The Commission on the National Guard and Reserves today defended a controversial recommendation in its recently released report that suggests placing active-duty military units under the operational control of governors during state emergencies. During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Commission Chairman Arnold Punaro and other commission members argued that the recommendation, which has been strongly opposed by Pentagon officials, would streamline the chain of command and improve disaster response.
In most cases, active-duty forces under the president's command can supplement state-run National Guard units for only a brief period of time, said retired Maj. Gen. Gordon Stump, a member of the commission and the former adjutant general of Michigan. For "unity of command purposes," Stump said, those active-duty units should temporarily fall under the control of the governor in many cases. "Every single response that we have is going to start with the National Guard," Stump said. "It doesn't matter what the government or anybody says -- that's just the way it is."
The commission's report "hit a small volcano" in the Pentagon over the recommendation on operational control, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., former committee chairman, said during the hearing. Indeed, Pentagon officials have argued that the recommendation, which they fear would take authority away from the federal government, is unconstitutional.
"The proposal of the Punaro commission is simply at odds with the theory of a federal system of government. It is at odds with Article II of the Constitution," Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs, said last week. "There can be only one commander in chief, and that is the president of the United States. To decentralize that command and control to 50 separate state governors invites confusion."
The recommendation did not draw any immediate support from members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, although Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs ranking member Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the commission was "right on the money" in its attempts to create a unity of command during disasters. "I'm not sure I agree with the proposed solution of bringing those troops under the control of the governor, but certainly you've identified a very real problem," she added. The lack of a unified command in charge of all military forces, Collins noted, hindered the response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
Warner likewise said the government needs to bring "total clarity" to the issue of chains of command during domestic emergencies. There must be a "clear, predetermined, established" chain of command, Warner added.
--Megan Scully