Congress is voting on whether to give Bush more power to invoke martial law. This is huge
In extended is a press release copied verbatim and in full (no copyright on government publications, folks) from Sen. Patrick Leahy on this topic. Read it.
This is from the "states' rights" party. Incredible. Giving Bush more power to declare martial law is begging for the clampdown. As the Clash said: what are you gonna do now?
as an act designed to empower the National Guard. But like some insect that sucks the juice out of another bug to fill the husk with its own malignant eggs, the Republican Congress is poised to use that name to gut the Posse Comitatus Act.
One would think that this couldn't happen here. Well, it's happening. Here.
U.S. SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY
CONTACT: Office of Senator Leahy, 202-224-4242
VERMONT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
The only action item I can think of is to write Sen. Leahy with our messages of support. I'm sure someone will think of something better.