Posted on Dec 11, 2014
Some (shallow) thoughts on the problem of politicians in the National Guard
2.12K
2
2
0
0
0
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/12/11/some-thoughts-on-the-problem-of-politicians-in-the-national-guard-joni-ernst/
The following are the thoughts of a friend of mine, to which I subscribe:
Caveat No. 1: The worst kind of barracks-JAGs are those with advanced degrees ... and know-it-all veterans. That goes for myself as well.
Caveat No. 2: I live in Iowa. I do not personally know Joni Ernst, nor have I worked with her in the past.
I wish the authors had taken a more comprehensive and researched approach to this topic.
The authors fail to mention, for example, the Army/Army Force Reserve until their last paragraph. The authors fail to indicate that National Guard soldiers are subject to state versions of the U.C.M.J. (In Iowa, it's the "Iowa Code of Military Justice" or I.C.M.J.) Actually, given that the authors acknowledge that Ernst was freely exercising her First Amendment rights ("[...] Ernst was, for legal purposes, a civilian with no additional restrictions on her right to political speech"), such missing details are less germane than they are indicative of the amount of thoughtful analysis they've applied here.
More importantly, the authors fail to mention how elected federal legislators, such as U.S. Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), have successfully/unsuccessfully navigated their concurrent roles in and out of uniform. This isn't a new problem. How has it been addressed in the past?
Finally, the authors fail to cite more than an Op-Ed essay in their exploration of this topic. Their own essay would've been far richer and more nuanced, had they included a discussion of other examples of political speech by citizen-soldiers, and how the military bureaucratic system monitors and corrects abuses. See, for example, this 2012 news story about an Army Reserve corporal who spoke at an Iowa political rally while wearing fatigues: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/01/06/soldier_at_ron_paul_rally_could_face_legal_trouble/
Given a time in which military veterans, families, and service members are increasingly seeking to bridge the perceived gaps of understanding between civilian and military, aren't the American people best served by citizens who happen to occasionally wear the uniform, rather than by citizens who abide by military rules? To paraphrase Voltaire, "I might not agree with what Ernst has to say, but I'll defend her right to say it."
Given her occasional service in uniform, that's probably what she believes, too.
The following are the thoughts of a friend of mine, to which I subscribe:
Caveat No. 1: The worst kind of barracks-JAGs are those with advanced degrees ... and know-it-all veterans. That goes for myself as well.
Caveat No. 2: I live in Iowa. I do not personally know Joni Ernst, nor have I worked with her in the past.
I wish the authors had taken a more comprehensive and researched approach to this topic.
The authors fail to mention, for example, the Army/Army Force Reserve until their last paragraph. The authors fail to indicate that National Guard soldiers are subject to state versions of the U.C.M.J. (In Iowa, it's the "Iowa Code of Military Justice" or I.C.M.J.) Actually, given that the authors acknowledge that Ernst was freely exercising her First Amendment rights ("[...] Ernst was, for legal purposes, a civilian with no additional restrictions on her right to political speech"), such missing details are less germane than they are indicative of the amount of thoughtful analysis they've applied here.
More importantly, the authors fail to mention how elected federal legislators, such as U.S. Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), have successfully/unsuccessfully navigated their concurrent roles in and out of uniform. This isn't a new problem. How has it been addressed in the past?
Finally, the authors fail to cite more than an Op-Ed essay in their exploration of this topic. Their own essay would've been far richer and more nuanced, had they included a discussion of other examples of political speech by citizen-soldiers, and how the military bureaucratic system monitors and corrects abuses. See, for example, this 2012 news story about an Army Reserve corporal who spoke at an Iowa political rally while wearing fatigues: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/01/06/soldier_at_ron_paul_rally_could_face_legal_trouble/
Given a time in which military veterans, families, and service members are increasingly seeking to bridge the perceived gaps of understanding between civilian and military, aren't the American people best served by citizens who happen to occasionally wear the uniform, rather than by citizens who abide by military rules? To paraphrase Voltaire, "I might not agree with what Ernst has to say, but I'll defend her right to say it."
Given her occasional service in uniform, that's probably what she believes, too.
Posted in these groups: Free Speech
Discipline
Discipline
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
MSG (Join to see), U.S. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, representing Hawai'i's second U.S. Congressional District is also a captain in the Hawai'i Army National Guard. Interestingly enough, when she was elected to her first term two years ago, there wasn't a whisper of conflict of which I'm aware. She was just handily reelected, again with no voiced concern that I heard.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Politicians in the National Guard. A few thoughts:
- I disagree that politicians in the National Guard is a problem from a systemic point of view although at an individual level there may be problems.
- I recall hearing that a person can not simultaneously be in two different branches of government therefore a person can not be an elected Congressman (legislative branch) and serving in the military (executive branch).
- Given above, I do not believe this constraint exists when talking two different levels (federal and state) and am not sure if it applies to Congress and Army Reserve. Need someone more informed than I to illuminate.
- Federal laws and military organizations are designed to ensure the military is an apolitical organization. That is why military members are not to express political opinions in public forums in uniform. The American public would perceive this as an official military position rather than an individual opinion.
- Given the historical low levels of elected officials who have prior military experience, we should be looking for more ways to get people with military experience elected and not less within the constraint noted above.
- I disagree that politicians in the National Guard is a problem from a systemic point of view although at an individual level there may be problems.
- I recall hearing that a person can not simultaneously be in two different branches of government therefore a person can not be an elected Congressman (legislative branch) and serving in the military (executive branch).
- Given above, I do not believe this constraint exists when talking two different levels (federal and state) and am not sure if it applies to Congress and Army Reserve. Need someone more informed than I to illuminate.
- Federal laws and military organizations are designed to ensure the military is an apolitical organization. That is why military members are not to express political opinions in public forums in uniform. The American public would perceive this as an official military position rather than an individual opinion.
- Given the historical low levels of elected officials who have prior military experience, we should be looking for more ways to get people with military experience elected and not less within the constraint noted above.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google