Confusion once again. Would you mind reading comments by podkane and commenting? (Or anyone else here who has thoughts on this, please comment). Apparently after 9/11 President did intervene. Thanks.
Here's the post:
Turns out she did ask him - Aug. 27... but even if she hadn't, the POTUS has the authority to send the NG without governors' permission - he did so immediately after 911...
GWB had an excellent plan in place by last year... go to the DHS website:
http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NRPbaseplan.pdf
problem was, it wasn't executed. Bush's advisers should step aside, and let Bush's natural leadership shine - he can fire the head of FEMA, who shouldn't have to wait on inept local politicians when a monumental disaster is about to occur. Using the obvious (i.e., the LA authorities were not up to the task) as an excuse for not taking charge himself, makes him look weak. Taking charge of chaotic situations that overwhelm state and local authorities is FEMA's whole reason for exisiting. To outsiders, it puts the admin. down on the level of Nagin or Blanco - just more politicians finger pointing.
65 posted on 09/05/2005 11:41:52 AM CDT by podkane
I'm really not tune into the discussion, but there is a difference between a terrorist attack and a natural disaster.
Federalization of troops during a terrorist attack is a given, it is not usually the case during a natural disaster.
But under the "Insurrection Act" the President if she is/was not willing to ask, the President could have declared the state and local governments "unable or unwilling" to care for their citizens, thus invoking the act.
Of course, if Bush had sent in Federal troops early, we'd be hearing the MSM bash Bush. Only this time it would be bashing him because troops were sent in too soon and he usurped the state's authority.
The man can't win with the MSM, never has, but he always comes out fine, and their bashing usually backfires on them.
For goodness sakes, why is it that I keep seeing you posting critical comments and asking for others to defend the President. Evacuating the city, getting people to secure shelters where they would be provided food and water and employing every resource to get them there should not have overwhelmed this city. This isn't a week long event...its months and months and months of managing both the displaced and the rebuilding.
That statement is not correct. The NG is under the Governor's command. Not the President's. The Guard does not fall under the President's command until it has been federalized...with the approval of the state. 9/11 does not apply here because that was a matter of National Security, and Guard assets used immediately after the initial strikes were Guard assets already assigned the role. No Guard troops were deployed without the direct coordination and approval of the Governors in command of those Guard units.
That sort of attack merits a response that is different from a predicted natural disaster. It's a canard to equate responses.
In other words, the answer to the question you ask was probably presented just a few pages back. RTFM. YMMV. ;-)