Governors Object to Bush's National Guard Plan
By ROBERT TANNER, AP


CHARLESTON, S.C. (Aug. 6) - The nation's governors are closing ranks in opposition to a proposal in Congress that would let the president take control of the National Guard in emergencies without consent of governors.

The idea, spurred by the destruction and chaos that followed Hurricane Katrina's landfall in Louisiana and Mississippi, is part of a House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act. It has not yet been agreed to by the Senate.

The measure would remove the currently required consent of governors for the federalization of the Guard, which is shared between the individual states and the federal government.

"Federalization just for the sake of federalization makes no sense," said Gov. Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana, a Democrat who had rough relations with the Bush administration after the disaster last year. "You don't need federalization to get federal troops. ... Just making quick decisions can make things happen."


Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, a Republican, said "a whole bunch of governors" were opposed to the idea after the proposed change was brought up in a private lunch meeting.

Some two dozen governors met in Charleston for three days of discussions at the annual summer gathering of the National Governors Association. The association's leaders sent a formal letter of opposition to House leaders last week.

The language in the House measure would let the president take control in case of "a serious natural or manmade disaster, accident, or catastrophe," according to the NGA.

"The idea of federalizing yet another function of government in America is a, the wrong direction, and b, counterproductive," Sanford said. "The system has worked quite well, notwithstanding what went wrong with Katrina."


------------------------------------------------------------

Personally I agree with this :

"The idea of federalizing yet another function of government in America is a, the wrong direction, and b, counterproductive,"

To take away the powers that are given to a state and instead have the federal government make those decisions is, in my opinion, a very dangerous thing and moves like that can and eventually will give the federal government way too much power and say over the states. To give away a little state power here and a little state power there could eventually lead to a form of communisim. The governmental system distinguishing powers between the states themselves and the feds were set up for a good reason.

And I also agree with this, but cannot accept who it is coming from :

"Federalization just for the sake of federalization makes no sense," said Gov. Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana, a Democrat who had rough relations with the Bush administration after the disaster last year. "You don't need federalization to get federal troops. ... Just making quick decisions can make things happen."



Her saying this really gets me. ESPECIALLY the very LAST line. Had a governor like Pataki, who stepped up and did what he had to do to get federal assitance on 9/11 made this statement, I wouldn't give it a second thought. But for someone like Blanco to make this statement is very amusing, and at the same time very sickening. Yeah, she really made some quick and speedy decisions before and during the hurricane. :rolleyes:


Don Cardi