National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I thank you, and I thank the Senator from Delaware.

As I have indicated, I would like to make some comments about how I think we can improve and clarify the legislation that was adopted last evening by unanimous consent. But, first, let me begin by recognizing, obviously, the extraordinary contributions of the men and women of our National Guard. I speak from the experience of just a few weeks ago having visited members of the 43rd Military Police Brigade of the Rhode Island National Guard who have the responsibility for the detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan. Under the able leadership of BG Charles Petrarca, they are doing an extraordinary job.

I also was able to talk with some of the members of our Air National Guard, the 143rd Airlift Wing. This is the finest C-130-J wing in the entire U.S. Air Force--National Guard or Active or Reserve, in my estimate. They are doing remarkable work.

They are doing remarkable work. In fact, we could not continue the operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, or our homeland security obligations, without the men and women of the National Guard.

I wish to also just say coincidentally that I had the great opportunity to sit down with my Adjutant General Kevin McBride. General McBride and his staff are extraordinarily effective professionals. I first got the chance to see him literally in action when he commanded the 43rd Military Police Brigade in Iraq, where they also had detention responsibilities.

So we are talking about now a component of our military forces that are professionals, superbly qualified, complete patriots, and dedicated to the success of the mission and the success of this Nation. There is the saying ``One Army'', as there is ``One Air Force,'' and it truly is. I can recall serving on Active Duty when there was at least a perception of disparity between Reserve, National Guard, and Active-Duty forces. That perception no longer exists. The reality is that these are superb professionals doing their job. So I think that is the starting point to consider this legislation.

What I would like to suggest in terms of an improvement to the legislation is clarifying the role and responsibility of the Chief of the National Guard Bureau as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If he has statutory responsibilities, those responsibilities should be specified.

As General McKinley, who is the current Chief of the National Guard Bureau and a superb professional, pointed out at the committee hearing:

The Chief of the National Guard Bureau still does not have an institutional position from which [he] can advise the President, the NSC, the Homeland Security Council, and Congress on non-federalized National Guard forces that are critical to homeland defense and civil support missions.

If this is the purpose of appointing and confirming the Chief of the National Guard Bureau as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that purpose should be laid out. If that is the role he or she is expected to play--to provide advice to the Chairman and advice to the President on the non-federalized National Guard forces critical to homeland defense and civil support missions--it should be spelled out. I hope it is spelled out as we go forward with the process of conferencing this legislation.

He went on to say:

Adding the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to the JCS, in my opinion, would ensure that in the post-9/11 security environment the National Guard's non-federalized role in homeland defense and civil support missions will be fully represented in all JCS deliberations.

I think this is very important. Let me suggest why--because one of the essentials of any military organization is unity of command. The National Guard Bureau has two separate services which it represents: the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard. We do not want, particularly at the level of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to confuse who speaks for the services--who speaks for the Army, who speaks for the Air Force. I think in order to do this--to preserve the unity of command, to make it very clear that at the deliberations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force speaks for the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Army speaks for the Army--we have to make it clear what the Chief of the National Guard Bureau is speaking to.

I hope as we go forward we can make it very clear as General McKinley made it very clear in his testimony that his perspective, his point of view, his position on the Joint Chiefs is related, as he said repeatedly, to those non-federalized functions of the National Guard, particularly with respect to homeland security and civil support missions. I think this would enhance and clarify the role of the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, and I also think it would avoid even the appearance of a lack of unity of command within the services.

I think these are important points. These points can be and should be approached in the conference. I hope that at the end of the day, when the President is prepared to sign this bill--and there may be other improvements to this legislation--that this particular aspect of the legislation is incorporated.

With that, I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source