State governors exert defense muscle

State governors exert defense muscle

Defense analyst Todd Harrison posed a fascinating question while we discussed the battle over the Air National Guard’s budget: When has a military service had to negotiate their budget request with a group of state officials?

The Council of Governors has grabbed the attention of the Pentagon. Formed in 2010 to improve the response to natural disasters, the  ten governors who sit on the council have reached out to the rest of the state governors and gained a consensus among 48 of the 50.  Each signed letters to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Armed Services Committees in their fight against the Air Force’s decision to place the brunt of the cuts to the service’s budget on the backs of the Air National Guard.

The National Guard has always had one of the strongest lobbying groups on Capitol Hill. It has a national reach and “in the end, all politics is local,“said Greg Kiley, a defense analyst who served six years as a senior professional staff member for the Senate Armed Services Committee. But neither he nor Harrison could think of a time when they played such a prominent role in the debate over a service’s budget.


Panetta tried to offer an olive branch by proposing to cut fewer guardsmen and transfer 24 of the older C-130s from active duty to the Guard. The governors didn’t bite and rejected the compromise. Instead, the council requested the funding for the Guard remain at 2012 levels.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz pushed back himself on Tuesday saying if Congress wants to give back more force structure, it better break out its checkbook. Otherwise, Congress will hollow out the Air Force.

“If you give us force structure back, give us the money too because the quickest way I know to a hollow force is if you give us force structure and no money,” Schwartz said Tuesday. “To just indicate that [the Air Force] keep it and make it work is not a satisfactory solution in my mind.”

In the end, Congress decides what gets funded and Schwartz can see the writing on the wall. The Air Force will have to find other targets to stomach the coming budget cuts because the Guard has too much support on Capitol Hill.

U.S. Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, reached out to the Council of Governors and enlisted their help in his battle against sequestration. McKeon wrote to the council saying he was “concerned that a satisfactory resolution with Secretary Panetta has not yet occurred.”

“You have my commitment to make sure your concerns are considered during Congress’ legislative efforts this year,” McKeon wrote.

It looks as if the Air Force will have to take its medicine. What appears to be the Air Force’s loss will serve as a major warning sign to Army leaders when it comes to slicing their Guard’s budget.

Hands off unless you have all your ducks in a row, or be prepared to rake your leadership over the coals.

Join the Conversation

Why can’t everybody just get their act together?…

Seems to me like the Governors are concerned that the DoD will solve it’s budget problems by just discarding the National Guard.

Frankly, this sequestration stuff is BS. Cut everything because 537 people aren’t adult enough to sit down and hammer out a budget. Stop me if I’m wrong…but isn’t that their JOB??

Oh, and if you think this is crazy, wait until the sequestration starts in on domestic programs and entitlements. Then the other parties and committees will be up in arms trying to stop it, too.

Sorry its politicos like McKenons and these Governors which will not only break the DoD but let sequestration hit next winter. instead of a compromise to make a deal they take a failing my way or the highway approach in which no one will win at all. Face it the DoD will have to stomach sequestration and other cuts the government is broken.

I think the states should start forming and bringing their State Guard units up to National Guard standards if the DoD starts stealing National Guard units away from them. That way states have Guard units that are state and CONUS only and National Guard Dual service.

Looks like the Air Force can’t keep fudging the numbers so they can keep funding the “Money Pit JSF” program. When they Sold Congress on a $60 Million price tag for the F-35 to replace the F-15’s & F16’s, Congress said OK because they got to keep all their current Air Guard groups and personnel ( Voters). But since the Glorious F-35 now costs any where from 2 to 3 times the price they quoted Congress now the Air Force will have to make cuts in numbers of F-35’s or find another solution that they don’t like.

Australia Delays F-35 Order by 2 Years. I think they are holding off to see just how much more it’s going to cost and how many more problems come up before the take the “Plunge”. They have fulfilled their original commitment to buy 2 F-35 which have already been delivered for testing and if they don’t want to don’t have to buy any more. So it begins the Spiral of Death.
http://​www​.defensenews​.com/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​/​2​0​1​2​0​5​0​3​/​D​E​FRE

Yo tee…if the program were to death spiral, what should we replace the F35 with?

F-22s? They cost less :)

Maybe…but I haven’t heard that formally discussed as an option. And, I think they just shut down the production line.

I think we have options to replace the F-35 from the F/A-18 E/F, Block 60 F-16 or the F-15SE

Time for the governors to take back the authority the Founding Fathers gave them and the militia (National Guard) from the usurper president (from both parties) and the federal government. The Founding Fathers didn’t give the authority to the president exactly because they would engage in foreign adventures and bankrupt the nation. Oh, wait! They just helped do that, using borowed money from China, Japan, pensioners, etc. Fully fund the Guard. Cut the Active Forces. Let the governors send their requirements and budgets straight to Congress.

Yeah…but I don’t think that’s gonna happen this budget cycle…

Those aren’t valid long-term options.

So, what does this mean? Will future DoD budgets need the approval of the Governors and thier TAGs? Is that even legal under Title 10? Do we really want a bunch of Governors, with little or no professional military training, trying to determine the “means” of national military strategy? Or, is this just election year politics in a bad economy, ie, a jobs program for the states? I think this has the potential to be a very dangerous slippery slop.

Yep it is their job and they’ve very seldom performed adequate work.

Right now both sides are planning to pout in their corners and then use the fallout in their political campaigns.

I completely agree that “The Founding Fathers didn’t give the authority to the president exactly because they would engage in foreign adventures and bankrupt the nation” but how do We The People reel that power back in?

As opposed to having a POTUS that has never served and knows virtually nothing about military matters “trying to determine the “means” of national military strategy”? So what’s the difference?

That slippery slope is no more dangerous that the POTUS sending our troops all over the world without the consent of the people.

my plan is to vote out incumbent after incumbent until we find one that is worth a dang in keeping. If we think that positive change comes out of voting for a President that pushes for massive unConstitutional legislation that reorderes a huge chunk of the economy, but never really commits to any one specific policy (single payer or public option) and declares victory when “something” is passed, VERSUS, actually managing and straightening out the federal government, then we get what we deserve.

Upgrade current aircraft and replace the current T-X program with a program that will produce a 5th gen light weight fighter and training aircraft.

That being said I don’t foresee them cancelling any of the three versions of the F-35.

Constitutional amendment.

The people in Washington have gotten to used to having power and want to keep it. It is not about being a duty to your country anymore.

You guys are missing a huge point here. 75–90% of the funding for the National Guard comes from the federal government NOT the states. Basic training, schooling, drill weekends, military schools, equipment, etc is all funded by the Feds. I work in the finance section for my state so I would know. It’s hard to yell at the people who actually fund the Guard when they have no more money. Sure we’re cheaper to keep around and maintain than active units but we also have our own problems. For instance, my state has around 4,000 soldiers/airmen tops in the Guard. Part of the 86th IBCT and the 158th Fighter Wing (F-16’s). We have a 2-star, about 3–4 1-star generals, 6–7 COL’s (Just on the Army side and probably 10 more on the Air Guard side) and an ungodly number of LTC’s running around. We are so inundated with officers it’s ridiculous and of course most of these are on full time orders for some BS excuse just so they can get the BAH/BAS. So while we are cheaper to run, you have all these people you “need” to keep around as well. The system is dumb and absolutely broken

You guys are missing a huge point here. 75–90% of the funding for the National Guard comes from the federal government NOT the states. Basic training, drill, military schools, equipment, etc is all funded by the Feds. I work in the finance section for my state so I would know. Sure we’re cheaper to keep around and maintain than active units but we also have our own problems. For instance, my state has around 4,000 soldiers/airmen tops in the Guard. Part of the 86th IBCT and the 158th Fighter Wing (F-16’s). We have a 2-star, about 3–4 1-star generals, 6–7 COL’s (Just on the Army side and probably 10 more on the Air Guard side) and an ungodly number of LTC’s running around. We are so inundated with officers it’s ridiculous and of course most of these are on full time orders for some BS excuse just so they can get the BAH/BAS. So while we are cheaper to run, you have all these people you “need” to keep around as well. The system is dumb and absolutely broken

It said this failed to load, apparently not lol

I’ve been voting against most incumbents for 20 years now. The only time I don’t vote against an incumbent is when his/her opponent is even worse.

I’d love to see term limits on Congress…and a reformation of their ludicrous retirement package.

Thanks for brinign that up — most Guard folks never mention those facts. Officer overload is a problem in many areas.

VT, I think the background on the proposed cuts to the ANG has more to do with the overall strategy than the cost. Looking at cost alone, the ANG is certainly cheaper than active duty, but, as you point out, maybe not as much as some think. I think the bigger issue is getting quick access to the resouces during a short, quick war and ability of the ANG to constantly rotate forces over a long period after the warfight is over.

One President, advised by the NSC, the SecDef and the CJCS (amongst others) versus 50 Governors advised by their TAGs and the Mayors of the towns and cities closest to thier ANG locations. I think that’s a big difference. If you believe the defense budget is bloated now, I think adding the Governors and TAGs to the process would bloat it even more, or unbalance it to the point of potentially hollowiing out the total force.

Between the Army using the National Guard model for Iraq and Afghanistan (because those 485,000 active duty troops are just too over worked to deploy to fight in two countries which haven’t left the dark ages — no air force, no navy), and the coming collapse of our federal government (which doesn’t even plan to pay of it $18 trillion in national debt), the governors need to take back the power to manage their citizen-soldier militias as the Founding Fathers intended. They need to reverse the change to Title 10 the feds put in place years ago, and should start pushing the legislation to change it rather than whine about it.

Did you ever read the constitution or history?

The national guard is NOT the state militia of old though they trace their roots to them. Who pays them/equips them? State wants to take control of the militia? No problem, just give back every weapon, truck, helicopter and major piece of equipment. Those will be issued in the event the militias will be federalized for a future emergency. Those items were paid for by the citizens of the other 49 states. Then do you really think that FIFTY states are going to have the same standards when it comes to training?

Some folks can’t think beyond their nose.

Preach it, maj.

Taxpayer…how do you think 50 different states could even come close to develop, funding, equipping and training to a national strategy?

Could it be all the idiots in DC need to find new jobs and quit funding every pet project that will get them elected over and over. Everyone is going to take a hit after the last 30 or 40 years of printing money to pay for something instead of spending what is available like the rest of us. Let’s stop giving all the crack heads cell phones because they are on food stamps or better yet make them take a drug test and limit the food stamps to 12 months; this one thing could pay for all the cuts together.

Let the governors pay the bill too and stop taking federal funds!

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | Become a fan on and follow us on
© 2013 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.