Remarks Of Sen. Patrick Leahy
Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill
The National Guard
Empowerment Amendment
June 21, 2006

I am pleased to join my colleague Senator Bond in discussing S.2658, the National Defense Enhancement and National Guard Empowerment Act of 2006.  A version of this groundbreaking legislation has been adopted by the Senate as an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2006 Defense Authorization Bill. 

Our amendment would tangibly strengthen our national security by giving the National Guard more of a voice in decision-making and in ensuring that our Nation is able to optimally tap the enormous experience and capabilities that exist within the National Guard. 

Today’s Guard is a 21st Century military organization that is carrying its weight and more in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as here at home, whenever disaster strikes.  But today’s Guard is needlessly frozen in a 20th Century Pentagon organization chart.  The implications of that show up in everything from the Guard’s depleted equipment stockpiles, to training and staffing and mission decisions.  Our amendment clears away some institutional cobwebs to let the National Guard be the best it can be.

The Bond-Leahy Amendment specifically increases the rank of the Chief of the National Guard from Lieutenant General to full General.  It will ensure that the deputy commander of United States Northern Command come from the ranks of the National Guard.  Additionally, the bill makes the National Guard a joint activity of the Department of Defense, giving the National Guard greater latitude to talk around the Pentagon.  Finally, the Guard would be given greater ability to identify gaps in capabilities in our States’ ability to respond to emergencies at home.

This amendment differs somewhat from the baseline legislation that Senator Bond and I introduced earlier this year.  The amendment does not include a requirement that the Chief of the National Guard sit on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and we also removed the provision that would give the National Guard separate budget authority.  We heard some strong objections from other members about these two provisions, and, as chairs of the wide-reaching Senate National Guard Caucus, we wanted to do the best we could to accommodate every Guard supporter. 

However, we still strongly believe in the importance of opening to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau a position on the Joint Staff and of giving to the Guard more general flexibility in procuring equipment to match the needs of its missions.  We will fight for these provisions another day.   

Given that we have dropped the core objections that some have raised against Guard empowerment, there was absolutely no reason that any member of the Senate could oppose this legislation.  This amendment is about fairness and effectiveness.  It is about fairness in that it makes sure that the National Guard is not treated like a stepchild in key budget and policy deliberations.  Giving greater institutional standing to the Guard makes it a lot harder for the Guard to get short-thrift in these discussions.

Our amendment is about effectiveness in that it will improve the use of the Guard in homeland security matters, which is becoming quite a regular phenomenon.  The National Guard is being used regularly in a so-called Title 32 status to increase security and provide military disaster response.  Under this status, the Guard serves under command-and-control of the Nation’s governors, with federal financing.  In addition to the recent Southern Border mission, the National Guard served spectacularly during Katrina in this way, providing one of the most effective responses to that disaster.  By allowing the National Guard to talk regularly across the Department of Defense and to work closely with the States to identify gaps, our amendment takes advantage of the knowledge of the members of the National Guard to help plug holes in our homeland defense.  And we make this whole process for activating the Guard in Title 32 far smoother.  

The National Guard is critical to the Nation’s defense on a number of levels.  We have to have the trust and confidence in this force to give them more responsibility.  At the same time, we simply cannot have a repeat of the ill-advised recommendations from the Army and the Air Force that sought to slash the National Guard personnel levels.  The Army wanted to cut the Army Guard by more than 17,000 troops and the Air Guard by almost 14,000.  These proposed cuts made absolutely no sense.

We need to turn this dynamic around.  We cannot keep asking the Guard to do more for the country, and then force it to justify its existence.  The National Guard needs institutional standing and leadership commensurate with its missions and capabilities. 

Our National Guard stands willing to do even more to protect the country, and this amendment will give them a key tool to help them contribute to the Nation’s defense.

I thank my colleagues and friends, the Chair and Ranking members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, for their support of this amendment.  We cannot afford to let our Guard down.

# # # # #