Posted on 03/05/2011 7:22:37 AM PST by Libloather
Bill would allow Brewer to call up state army for any reason
By Michael Truelsen
Updated: Mar 03, 2011 10:41 PM EST
(KOLD) - A bill under consideration by the Arizona Legislature would allow Gov. Jan Brewer to call up a state army for any reason she chooses.
Under state law, the governor can call up a state guard if the National Guard is pressed into service. But SB 1495 would expand those powers to "any other reason the governor considers to be necessary."
The bill reads:
If the national guard of Arizona or a major portion thereof is called into active federal service, or if the national guard or a major portion thereof is alerted for federal service OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON THE GOVERNOR CONSIDERS TO BE NECESSARY, the governor may establish an armed force for the safety and protection of the lives and property of the citizens of the state which shall be known as the Arizona state guard.
(Excerpt) Read more at kold.com ...
This one I oppose.
bttt
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The only thing is the funding. It says it would come from the NG funding. Which by Federal Law (The Militia Act of 1903 established the NG) is a different thing entirely. So that part may need to be amended to keep funding separate.
Otherwise, good Bill. Real 'Citizen Soldiers' again.
While Brewer may be trustworthy, this is not a blank check we want to leave on the books for any future government in any State. Far too over-reaching.
Why?
Long overdue. The Federal army won’t be used to protect the border; the National Guard (established 1903) is little more than a reserve for the Federal army, and can be federalized and sent home if called up. Arizona and the other states on the border with Mexico will need their own armed forces if the border is ever to be controlled.
And who will the next Governor be that can do this at any time?? We don’t know. I oppose this too.
According to the United States Code section 10.311
the militia is already at her disposal.
Correct?
The unorganized militia that so many have not been educated about.
The section describes in detail who is in it(like it or not) and who isn’t (very few)
“I think she wants to call up the guard to do the job Obama won’t do and that is to protect her citizens at the boarder.”
I believe you are correct...however, such laws are slippery slopes - good, as long as the leader is “good” - bad, when the leader is “bad.”
Question: What does it take to federalize the National Guard? Is congressional approval required, or can the president do it all on his own?
From our NC state constitution:
ARTICLE XII
MILITARY FORCES
Section 1. Governor is Commander in Chief.
The Governor shall be Commander in Chief of the military forces of the State and may call out those forces to execute the law, suppress riots and insurrections, and repel invasion.
That would be an ideal statement for AZ (or any State) versus the blanket statement written into this bill.
Ike did it by himself in the Little Rock situation in 1957- he federalized the Arkansas National Guard after Governor Faubus called it up to prevent the black kids from going to school. Current law states that the President does have the authority to control the National Guard, within his powers as commander in chief.
Like I keep saying the ONLY thing that gets FedGov™s attention is power. Nothing says power like a state forming its own regiments NOT in control of FedGov™. I LOVE IT!
The Constitution grants the federal government a specific clause regarding militias that is separate from the clauses regarding establishing and funding an Army/Navy:
“To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
...
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;”
If one also looks at the National Guard as under the Armies clause instead of Militia, then the scope increases to include use in a declaration of war, to punish offenses against the laws of nations and piracies, and enforce laws on the high seas. “
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.