Huckabee defends states' rights
Last week we referred you to an account of the recent National Governors Association meeting in Charleston, at which Gov. Mike Huckabee led a rhetorical revolt against the federal government's intrusion into traditional realms of state authority.
Now he's gone off and written a letter.
In an unusual act of bipartisan and regional unanimity, 51 governors have joined to voice their strong opposition to legislation to let the president federalize National Guard troops in a disaster without local authorities’ consent.
In a letter to Congressional leaders last week, the governors detailed their argument that the measure, drawn up after Hurricane Katrina and tucked into a military authorization bill that the House recently passed, would undermine their authority and autonomy.
"This provision was drafted without consultation or input from governors," read the letter, conceived in large part by Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, a Republican, "and represents an unprecedented shift in authority from governors as Commanders and Chief of the Guard to the federal government.
"We take very seriously our constitutional duty to protect our citizens and lead our guard. We are responsible for the safety and welfare of our citizens and are in the best position to coordinate all resources to prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters."



Comments
Unfortunately, the federal government never heard of the concept called 'federalism'. It runs throughout the consitution. It is at the heart of our constitutional government. What we have today is exactly what the founding fathers feared. A run away central government and impotent state governments that exist merely as administrative arms of a central government.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2006 08:04 AM
A$a would put out the red carpet.
Meanwhile, here's some news that should warm the hearts of you anonymous war-lovers. Why do you hate soldiers and their families?
"About 300 U.S. soldiers who just weeks ago returned home to Alaska after a year in
Iraq are being ordered back to try to help bolster security in Baghdad, the U.S. Army said on Monday."
Posted by: Roland | August 15, 2006 08:07 AM
Mr. Huckabee is a good southern boy. We have had to defend the States against the north before. Remember the War of Northern Agretion?
Posted by: Raven | August 15, 2006 08:08 AM
Well I guess it is called the National Guard.
I don't know the rules. Does the Constitution give the states the right to run independent state armies?
Who pays the expenses of the National Guard?
It's funny that Huckabee gets huffy that the Governors were not consulted before the Guard was nationalized. His Excellency the President does not consult mere state governors. Surely Huckabee would know that.
Posted by: Spirit | August 15, 2006 08:10 AM
The Huckster says, "We are responsible for the safety and welfare of our citizens and are in the best position to coordinate all resources to prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters."
Why is he so quick, then, to ask for federal disaster money after a flood, a tornado, a hail storm and every other creek-topper?
Posted by: Quapaw | August 15, 2006 08:16 AM
Maybe the 51 governors are starting to find out what us common citizen/tax payers already know: the Fed's don't want our input or our support - just send money.
Posted by: 19thgeneration | August 15, 2006 08:26 AM
Well that's some timely Enlightenment ole Huck's happened upon...like a death-bed 'come to Jesus' moment.
Though a few governors have been expressing concerns with the Bush Regime's abuse of everything and everyone...devout Bushie Huck hasn't been one of em. So I'm thinkin' it's all part of Huck's traveling I-want-to-be-prez show.
You don't have to be a Constitutional scholar to realize the National Guard wasn't NEVER intended to be deployed to places like Iraq. It's common sense and it's one more thing that Bush has done his best to misuse and abuse.
It's time for a few Bush/Cheney children to serve in Bush's War.
I think Bush should campaign for Huckabee while he's lounging with Joe and A$a. In fact the trio (Bush/Huck/A$a) should spend several days touring the state as like-minded compatriots.
Posted by: zelda | August 15, 2006 09:28 AM
I await an equally strong stand against SBC-AT&T's efforts to have Arkansas legislators encourage our senators to support the Ted Stevens bill that would strip authority from states and municipalities to negotiate cable franchises, that would abolish Net Neutrality, and that would otherwise give the corporate whores a free ride at the expense of Arkansas citizens.
Posted by: Delphi | August 15, 2006 10:37 AM
HELLO---The national guard (used to be called state militia) has been used in the past to fight foreign wars. They have been used in all our major wars but used extensively since the civil war (domestically) with the exception of Vietnam when they were used more sparingly.
During the civil war they made up the bulk of the army since the regular standing army was so small. The other 'legal scholar' in this blog who states that they were never intended to be used in Iraq must be showing their young years or lack of knowledge of the constitution.
In fact, the Persian Gulf War I and II represents the whole purpose in having guard and reserve units. They augment a standing army. Some MOSs are reserved to reserve and guard units and not regular army units. As an example, Civil Affairs is totally a reserve function.
I guess when you haven't been in the service you are not inclined to be aware of these facts.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2006 10:45 AM
Of course all this comes from Bush's announcement that 6000 National Guard would be sent to the southern border to keep them pesky Mexicans out.
Bush forgot the law says governors control each state's National Guard and he has to say mother may I first. And we all know Bush thinks it's easier to apologize (ha, never) than to ask permission.
Last time I looked about 2500 National Guard had moseyed down south to protect us from the Brown Menace. There's some National Guard egg on the Bush face. I figure these 51 governors sense a Rove rear attack and signed this letter to use as garlic and holy water against Vampire Bush. They must know a Rove wallop is coming their way for daring to say no to the Bush monster.
If you'll look back Governor Blanco of Louisiana told Bush to kiss her water-logged ass right after Katrina hit. Bush's first condition for helping was that she turn over the states National Guard to the Feds. She said BITE ME and won that round.
Our country nearly went under between 1800 and 1810 because of a fight over state's rights. It often pops up when DC is inhabited with unpopular leaders and the states want to distance themselves for their own safety. Looks like we're living in such a time again.
The quick fix is to vote out the Republicans this November and cut in half the out of control power of the White House.
Posted by: Deathbyinches | August 15, 2006 10:52 AM
I doubt if President Kennedy consulted with or received approval from Gov. Wallace when Kennedy federalized the Alabama National Guard in the 60s.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2006 10:59 AM
So Eisenhower had to get Faubus' OK before he could nationalize the National Guard in the Little Rock crisis?
I thought the whole deal then was that the governor was using them to prevent integration and the President undercut Faubus by nationalizing the guard and taking control of them without the governor's approval.
But I was a baby then and they didn't consult me. I do remember there were other federal forces brought in from other states.
I need a lot of educating on this subject.
Posted by: Spirit | August 15, 2006 11:02 AM
Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and then he called in the 101st airborne.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2006 11:09 AM
Jim Holt would put the Arkansas National Guard to good use, I'm sure.
A little ethnic purging would play well in NWA.
It would be like Dawn of the Dead, only instead of zombies they'd be hunting Hispanics.
Then they could dump the bodies in the river and let them float into Oklahoma. No mess, no fuss.
Posted by: Roland | August 15, 2006 11:35 AM
"You don't have to be a Constitutional scholar to realize the National Guard wasn't NEVER intended to be deployed to places like Iraq."--zelda
Just a few comments on this. Anonymous has explained it all very well. The Constitution gives the central government the power/authority to use state militias (National Guards) for federal service. When this is done, governors are no longer the commander in chief of their state units because the president is now in control. That is why Ike federalized the Arkansas NG....so they would have to follow his commands rather than those of Gov. Faubus. Their mission immediately changed. Instead of being used by the state to keep black students out of Central, they now had new orders to escort/protect/shield those black students.
It's all constitutional.
Posted by: Cato | August 15, 2006 11:36 AM
Thanks for the corrections. I was wrong and evidently it is Constitutional for the prez to use the NG to fight in foreign wars (Vietnam just blew right past my memory). I still don't like it...but hey, I don't like most of what's gone on the last 6 years.
So the federal government can use the NG to either do the things the regular military can't (like the desegregation stuff) or to fill in the holes when it's over-committed outside the country...and the prez has the last word?
Posted by: zelda | August 15, 2006 12:49 PM
The prez called up the 39th Infantry Brigade of the Arkansas National Guard. They served their country honorably in Iraq and we can be proud of them. Thanks, guys.
They are now serving on our southern border.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2006 01:09 PM
Yes, zelda. The role of the NG has changed tremendously. Originally designed to help with floods, storms, civil disobedience, etc., the NG has become the junior wing of the Regular Army.
Posted by: Cato | August 15, 2006 01:21 PM
What gets my goat is those National Guard commercials that are playing before movies now. They really, really play up the "help my neighbor in times of trouble" part but never ever mention over-seas duty. I think that's misleading, don't you? Anyone know the percent of our troops over seas who are guard/reserve vs. active, full-time folks? Maybe this plays into that whole recruitment problems the GAO discovered...
Posted by: Liberal and Proud | August 15, 2006 06:50 PM
Hey liberal and proud,
Do you honestly think that guys who see that commercial don't know that the guard serves in Iraq?
Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2006 07:15 PM
Just hang out at your local mall and listen to the Army recruiter in action. They talk pie in the sky....picking Hawaii for your place to serve. It sounds like a vacation prize from the Price is Right.
Not one damn word about Iraq, Afghanistan. Combat is not a word ever used. DEAD is never used. Maimed is never used. He'll just go on and on about free food and lodging and medical care and paid vacations and saving all your big pay because the government gives you everything you need. It's like winning a lottery with a long pay out.
I really think if you're fixing to sell your butt for 2 or 3 years and with at least 2 endless wars are going on and with 2504 of your fellow service men coming home in a flag draped box, that the recruiter should be forced to say......at the very end of his spiel...in a very soft voice...oh and it could kill ya.
My cigarette package says....it could kill ya on it...why isn't the military required to tell Gomer from Oark that the Surgeon General has determined that exposure to military service in 2006 carries a 2.7% chance of DEATH. Where is that truth in advertising?
Posted by: Deathbyinches | August 15, 2006 09:28 PM
Hey liberal and proud,
Do you honestly think that guys who see that commercial don't know that the guard serves in Iraq?
Posted by: Anonymous
I made the very same comments here on the movie previews months ago. Obviously, most of the kids who enlist don't know the guard serves in Iraq, or they wouldn't enlist.
Anon overestimates the worldliness of the bottom 20% of this year's senior class.
Cheney, on the other hand, knows the bottom 20% well, though he, personally, avoids their type with a passion.
Posted by: Spirit | August 15, 2006 09:54 PM