Hunter/McHugh Amendment to Assert Congressional Oversight Over Women in Land Combat Issue

CENTER FOR MILITARY READINESS ^ | May 23, 2005 | Elaine Donnelly, President

[strategofr]

You have probably read about passage of legislation by the House Armed Services Committee last Wednesday to codify women’s exemption from direct ground combat units, and support units that collocate with them.

Contrary to many news reports, this Hunter/McHugh Amendment is stronger than an earlier version passed in the Military Personnel Subcommittee because it affects all branches of the service, not just the Army.

During the debate late on Wednesday evening HASC Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and Subcommittee Chairman John McHugh (R-NY) showed impressive leadership in explaining why the legislation is necessary. It is, as they said, entirely appropriate for Congress to “take charge” of this issue by exercising responsible oversight.

Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) has announced that she will offer an amendment to strike the Hunter/McHugh Amendment. In essence, she and her Democrat/feminist allies will be arguing in favor of female soldiers being forced into direct ground combat, without congressional oversight or limitations.

If you oppose this move, please read on and prepare to express your views today!

Debate on the Defense Authorization Bill for 2006 (H.R. 1815) will begin this week, after the Rules Committee meets tomorrow (Tuesday) All members of the House will be called upon to vote. If the Hunter/McHugh Amendment remains in the bill, despite Rep. Wilson’s expected attempt to strike it, the issue will become an item to be taken up later in a House/Senate Conference Committee. (There is no comparable legislation in the Senate version of the same bill.)

The phone/fax numbers and e-mail addresses for your own member of the House of Representatives can be found at www.house.gov.

I will send more information later today. In the meantime, the articles linked here provide commentary on the importance of legislation to codify current Defense Department regulations that exempt servicewomen from assignment to smaller “tip of the spear” land combat units, such as infantry and armor battalions, and embedded support companies that collocate with them. The first appeared in yesterdays “Insight” section of the San Diego Union-Tribune:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050522/news_lz1e22gender.html Excerpt from the article:

“ The U.S. Army doesn't know it yet but it owes the House Armed Services Committee and its chairman, San Diego's Rep. Duncan Hunter, a debt of thanks. In a largely party-line vote Wednesday night, the committee's Republican majority voted to codify the Army's own regulations and Defense Department policy on keeping women soldiers out of ground combat units.” This article by George Neumayr of the American Spectator expresses impatience with the Bush Administration for tolerating the Army’s opposition to the Hunter/McHugh legislation:

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8194 Excerpt from the Neumayr article:

“The unlawful collocation policy that Duncan Hunter's legislation seeks to correct is a stunning illustration of the Army's willingness to pursue a feminist agenda at the expense of military effectiveness. The policy has no military rationale. Indeed, it seems designed to make it more likely that the military will lose battles, as it requires (according to the Army's own description of the policy) "evacuating" female troops embedded in these brigade units should they run into battle conditions. Assets and attention needed to win the battle will be dissipated in order to move female troops to the rear, all so that politically correct generals can pat themselves on the back for giving women the chance to advance in their military careers through the quasi-combat experience of collocation.”

Please take a moment to forward this message to others you know to be concerned about the issue of women in land combat, and a strong national defense. I will send more information later—thank you for your help.

Elaine Donnelly President CENTER FOR MILITARY READINESS Post Office Box 51600 Livonia, MI 48151 elaine@cmrlink.org

[strategofr]

This is about keeping women out of combat. The army is trying to cricumvent laws preventing women in combat. There are 2 reasons: 1) feminism (yes, PC is strong in the Army!) and 2) expediency. We are reorganizing our support functions to make them more effective. They will be in smaller units, tied more closely to the combat teams they support (as opposed to being part of a large "support" organization as in the past. This is making it less possible to separate out "combat" and non-combat units. The army, simply, is short of the men required to staff these close support units, so they want to use women, even though it is illegal.

I'm giving it straight here as I understand it, not sugar coating. I have not been in the service myself but have an interest in military history/military issues.