Republican governors Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida
handwritten letter On Friday, the Democratic administration denounced a proposal that would effectively take control of National Guard troops away from governors across the country.
The two Republicans were late to the party when they announced their opposition to the U.S. Air Force’s legislative proposal, Proposition 480. Governors of 48 states and leaders of five U.S. territories expressed opposition to LP480 in a letter to the Department of Defense last month.
a sneaky suggestion
Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall approved the bill on March 15. The Department of Defense then introduced a bill.
LP480 It was submitted to the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 29.
LP480 will allow the Secretary of the Air Force to transfer targeted space functions currently performed by the Air National Guard to the U.S. Space Force. The Secretary will be able to change the status of an ANG unit to his USSF unit, deactivate the unit, or assign the unit to a “new federal mission.”
The proposed bill would also waive the requirement to first obtain the governor’s consent before making such changes to National Guard units.
Kendall suggested to lawmakers that the bill does not set a precedent that would allow other forces to cannibalize the National Guard without the governor’s consent.
report Break through the defense.
“this [issue] “This is a product of the creation of the Space Force,” Kendall said. “This is a unique situation. We have no intention of moving things out of the guard and making any other changes.”
Following last month’s House Armed Services Committee hearing on the U.S. Air Force’s fiscal year 2025 budget request, Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said:
reportedly “I fully support it,” he said.
“I think what the Air Force is proposing will be successful,” Rogers said. “We’re used to the National Guard Association being a very political organization that does this kind of political work. This is not something they should be wasting their time on, and it’s not something they can be successful in. there is no.”
If all the nation’s governors had their way, the National Guard Association would prove Rogers wrong.
backlash
Let. Maj. Gen. Francis M. McGinn, president of the U.S. National Guard Association, said:
I got it. An April 16 editorial called the proposal an “existential threat to the National Guard.”
“This move represents serious overreach by the federal government and should be of concern to governors and federal legislators alike,” McGinn wrote. “This is an attempt to circumvent the long-standing authority given to the Legislature to require the consent of the governor before removing National Guard troops from the state.”
McGinn pointed out that the proposal says the troop transfer would be “done without regard” to two existing laws regarding the governor’s powers, calling the bill “an override of the anti-robbery law that would force lawmakers to ignore the anti-robbery law.” He likened it to asking the government for permission to rob your neighbor by asking for the same. The amateurish approach is legally questionable at best and a violation of the established legislative process. ”
In response, Kendall said: “Frankly, the Guard’s response to this has been over the top.”
“We are not talking about an existential crisis. No one is suggesting the dismantling of the guard,” he added.
The Secretary of the Air Force was clearly not successful in winning over the skeptics.
Weeks after Colorado Democratic Gov. Jared Polis was more or less sworn into office.
Said Pentagon to keep state’s ANG forces untouched, days after Governor’s Council I have written Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin objected, and the governors of 48 states and five U.S. territories followed suit.
The National Governors Association said in a later report:
April letter He told Secretary Austin that the proposed bill “ignores the governor’s authority over the National Guard and undermines more than 100 years of precedent and national security and military preparedness.”
Recognizing the importance of ensuring the National Guard is equipped and ready to serve as a “combat reserve in support of national security missions and domestic emergencies,” governors said the National Guard ” It is essential that we retain the powers established in the United States Code.” (USC) Title 32, Section 104. ”
The governor’s letter further notes that LP 480 specifically conflicts with Section 18238 of Title 19, which “provides that no Air National Guard unit may be removed or withdrawn without consultation and approval from the Governor.” Furthermore, it violates Section 104 of Title 32.” Provides that no changes may be made to the branch, organization, or assignment of National Guard units within a state or territory without the approval of the governor. ”
Governors suggested the bill would ultimately strain relations with the Department of Defense. undermine the authority of the governor; Negative impact on military readiness. and threatens the careers of our nation’s military personnel.
Abbott, DeSantis and members of Congress also attended.
Mr. Abbott and Mr. DeSantis joined the action on Friday.
governor of texas underlined In a letter Friday to President Joe Biden, LP480 said it would sideline the governor as commander-in-chief of the National Guard.
After emphasizing the critical role the Texas National Guard plays in protecting Texans, responding to civil unrest and responding to disasters, Abbott wrote that the LP480 “poses an intolerable threat” to the force.
“Congress has long required the consent of the governor before transferring troops from the National Guard, which he commands, see 32 USC § 104; 10 USC § 18238. “By allowing for the dismantling of the state on a whim, Prop. 480 would set a dangerous precedent,” Abbott added.
In an X post accompanying Mr. Abbott’s statement:
I have written“President Biden and his administration are taking power over the National Guard. They are giving the Secretary unilateral authority to disband National Guard units on a whim.”
DeSantis wrote his
friday’s letter of condemnation To the President of the Senate and the ranking members of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees.
“As a low-lying, storm-prone state, Florida is uniquely vulnerable to hurricanes and flooding, requiring large-scale, ready logistics and disaster assistance, including National Guard troops,” DeSantis said. he wrote. “This bill weakens that guarantee and circumvents the governor’s authority to ensure Floridians are prepared and protected to deal with domestic emergencies, especially as hurricane season approaches again. It’s about.
In addition to the governor, there is bipartisan opposition to the plan in both chambers of Congress.
Twenty-nine senators and 56 members of the House of Representatives asked the leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to remove this proposal from the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025.
report Washington Examiner.
In a letter to their committees, the lawmakers said LP480 was “seriously flawed” and noted that Congress “has an obligation to uphold the integrity and long-standing traditions of the National Guard.” “A proposal of this magnitude threatens to undermine the standing of the National Guard,” he added. [sic] It has a history of over 120 years. ”
According to The Hill, White House officials indicated that the Biden administration supports the proposal.
Do you like Blaze News? Avoid censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get articles like this delivered straight to your inbox. Please register here!
