Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why don't governors 'unfederalize' the National Guard and remove.....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Chocolatebison Donating Member (91 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:33 AM
Original message
Why don't governors 'unfederalize' the National Guard and remove.....
them from being a federal fighting force?

Prior to 1913 they were totally under state control.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jecks Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. Because of the
National Defense Act of 1916. It was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1918 and authorizes the federal government to use National Guard forces over seas in foreign conflict.

The NDA would have to be either repealed or re challenged.

Governors cannot simply "un federalize" the National Guard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chocolatebison Donating Member (91 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thanks
Did not know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SonofMass Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. Sorry, but I think Ed McMahon has that line copyrighted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Thank you.
Maybe it's time to challenge the National Defense Act of 1916.

Welcome to DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. I was thinking the same thing...
Perhaps California would stop all support to the National Guard here, and instead put in place a State Militia and declare that those signing up for it wouldn't be draftable if a national draft were started. And there couldn't be any federal "grabbing" of State Militia members or resources to go off on these wars he's starting...

Might also help if we have to resort at some point to putting through a secession proposition. Then we can have clear ownership of these resources as California's military forces if need be. Would make sure that these resources are in place to do firefighting and other needed emergency relief, and therefore not have to worry about them being shortchanged and sent to Iraq, unlike the northwestern states that were worried about not being prepared for fire season with the feds taking away their National Guard helicopters, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chocolatebison Donating Member (91 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. North Carolina has it's own militia
but apparently it hasn't been activated in years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jecks Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. That is correct....
Unless you count the right wing NCCM there has been no active militia since they fought on the side of the Confederacy in the Civil War.


State Militias with no federal control are dangerous animals.

See also "Army of Northern Virginia"

National Guard units used poorly or illegally by the President are even more dangerous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MildyRules Donating Member (739 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. One minor question
Where would the NG and ANG get the planes, tanks, etc now provided and paid for by the Federal Govt?

Nothing stops ANY state from forming a militia using its own funding. But if you use Uncle Sugar's money, there are usually strings attached.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chocolatebison Donating Member (91 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. State tax dollars
States can still buy automatic weapons and tanks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MildyRules Donating Member (739 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Not sure about the tanks...
But what State do you think is REALLY going to do that???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. Yup, it would probably cost states a lot of money...
Edited on Tue Aug-30-05 12:04 PM by calipendence
to do this, but in these times, perhaps it will at some point be a necessary time to rise up against the fascist control that's coming down from the feds. At least with a state militia, there can be no doubt who would "own" it, should we find it necessary to do a secession.

The big question I would have, is if there would be a way to have enlistees immune to a federal draft. That would definitely be a battle of jurisdiction. If a draft did come, it would also give conscientious objectors an alternative rather than trying to fight the issues of being drafted, if a way to legally challenge federal authority would be found here.

Given that Bush turned down federal funding to get rid of the fire hazards that were created by the bark beetle in federal parklands here that largely contributed to the wildfires here a year ago or so, perhaps there could be some legal precedent that would allow us to do something like take over that parkland if the feds aren't adequately funding it. Perhaps other programs and resources could be handled the same way. The fed's long delayed response to this state's bipartisan congressional and state politician's request for assistance came in the day before the fires started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
5. They would go to jail for treason
That's the first reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
10. Now this is a real second amendment issue
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

So states aren't allowed to form a "well regulated militia"?

Even the most narrow interpretation of the 2nd amendment should allow this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fenris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
14. Check the profile, kids.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlGore-08.com Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
15. Illinois is suing over the plan to move an air national guard unit from IL
to Indiana, which may or may not directly challenge this ruling.

I'm not sure, however, that y'all have really thought this through. Do you really want Jeb Bush to have control of a state army with tanks? Do you really want the governor of Ohio to have a similar army? Do you want South Carolina to have its own tanks, and then watch it secede after the fundies have succeeded in turning it into a Christian nation?

Do these state armies get to control their own nukes? Do you really want the Governor of Texas to have the ability to nuke those Godless heathens in New York City? Do you really want the states to get into arms races with each other?

Smirk will not be with us forever. There are other right wing menaces waiting in the wings. None of them need to have an army of their own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-30-05 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I think at this point, I'm more for not it being a military force...
I would just want it to be people that we could deploy here in California if needed for things like fighting fires, etc. and various tools like helicopters to help with those sorts of things. I would think at this point we'd want to keep too much military weaponry out, but I still at some point wonder if there will be a time when California leads the blue states into secession. We're still a ways away from that, but with the way things have been going the last few years, I'd like to feel prepared if that became necessary.

We'll need to be ready at that point with some force of bodies to function as a domestic military. If we have this militia, even if they haven't had a huge amount of control or experience with big military hardware, they'd be a cohesive group that you already have signed up for service to the state, which could help you be half way there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC