Can military members serve in elected political positions?

2014-04-11T22:00:50-04:00

We all should know that service members cannot express political opinion in uniform, or as a representative of the US Armed Forces. However, there are many examples in history when members of the Armed Forces were not only politically active, but were even serving in full time political jobs.

For example, take former Senator Scott Brown, who served as Senator of Massachusetts while simultaneously serving as a Lieutenant Colonel in the MA National Guard. Do you this the is pinnacle of the Citizen-Soldier concept, or do you think this is a bad idea?

Also, while some reservists have filled full time political roles, do you know of any cases of active duty service members filling elected political positions (some local political positions are part-time)?

** Edited update: I found the regulation that appears to govern this. It's not UCMJ but rather DoD Directive 1344.10 which explicitly says it applies to Active Duty personnel, and that reservists can hold public office, unless they are called to active duty for 270 days or more. I assume that means continuously.

Response by CW2 Jonathan Kantor made Apr 11 at 2014 10:04 PM

2014-04-11T22:04:37-04:00

Active duty personnel cannot serve in political office, but for NG and Reservists, it's not illegal.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Apr 11 at 2014 10:18 PM

2014-04-11T22:18:41-04:00

Senator Lindsay Graham is a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve, and of course a Senator from South Carolina. He served a few of his annual training requirements in both Iraq and Afghanistan. There a handful of other reservists currently serving in Congress as well.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2014 10:20 PM

2014-04-11T22:20:57-04:00

Lindsay Graham is also serving as a Colonel in the ANG. I think it is a good thing.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Apr 11 at 2014 10:32 PM

2014-04-11T22:32:08-04:00

Reservists can legally do so. Totally legit. In the abstract, I think it is the pinnacle of the CITIZEN Soldier.

HOWEVER... I think it opens a practical can of worms. I am not sure how you are COL Graham one weekend a month without also being Senator Graham. You can thread the needle of not mentioning politics and being 100% in line with the Chain of Command on drill status, but I don't see how your politics can be ignored by your troops. Especially outspoken statements about the current administration. Legal fictions are dangerous.

I believe that the right answer is a change to UCMJ that both allows public statement of political views by serving Officers/Service members while somehow still protecting the neutrality of the military. However, as "right" as that answer is, I have no idea how you could credibly pull it off. So it remains.... tricky.

I can think of any number of AC Officers who started campaigning - subtly or not so subtly while still on active duty. And an even greater number who used their status as a "former" (whether resigned, retired, or IRR) status as Officers as part of their pitch/claim of credibility. I can't think of any who held elected (as opposed to appointed) positions while still in uniform. I believe that would be a clear violation of UCMJ.

Response by SGT Craig Northacker made Apr 11 at 2014 10:48 PM

2014-04-11T22:48:30-04:00

Great question. Upon some reflection, I think it is good because it can help keep the process honest, although there may be temptation in a not so good way with the wrong combination. A state legislator has a different level of influence than a federal one. It is similar to the draft, in my mind, where continuous flow of personnel from a varied population helps keep the system somewhat honest.

There are legal safeguards in place, but after watched the wretched abuse of the legal system by prosecutors and politicians, being held accountable for wrongdoing would only exist if there were some powerful political wheels in motion.

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Apr 11 at 2014 10:49 PM

2014-04-11T22:49:09-04:00

I have heard stories from a 1LT that I work with about a currently serving Senator in Hawaii that recently did her MICCC course. She informed us that the base commander was trying to schmoze her, but she continued to insist that she was just a CPT at that time. It does open a can of worms for sure, but its an interesting concept.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Apr 11 at 2014 11:02 PM

2014-04-11T23:02:14-04:00

Tammy Duckworth is currently a Congresswoman (D-IL) and continues to serve in the Illinois National Guard despite being a double amputee from her service in Iraq, when her Blackhawk was hit by an RPG.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2014 12:04 AM

2014-04-12T00:04:38-04:00

I actually ran for a state office in Georgia in 2008 and was serving in the reserves. One of my opponents took me to court to try to have my name removed off the ballot, because he found the DoD directive. He didn't read the entire directive and subsequently lost the case. I couldn't use anything related to my service on my campaign handouts, if it showed me in uniform. There's a fine line of serving in the military and being politically active.

Response by SSG Jeffrey Spencer made Apr 15 at 2014 2:25 PM

2014-04-15T14:25:07-04:00

Not all that long ago, military service was practically a requirement for serving in Congress.

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/2013/09/Veterans-and-Congress_2.png

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 18 at 2014 10:44 PM

2014-07-18T22:44:37-04:00

Beau Biden is Delaware's Attorney General.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 19 at 2014 10:41 PM

2014-09-19T22:41:14-04:00

GA Marshall does not approve.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Sep 20 at 2014 7:45 AM

2014-09-20T07:45:19-04:00

I'm on board with COL Vincent Stoneking. Kudos to those who have accomplished it because it cannot be an easy feat.

The "contradiction" I see is that the military is overseen by civilians so how can one as a civilian politician provide oversight to one's self as a member of the military. Not to mention that one would have a "free" forum for subtle campaigning which if taken in context could be a form political support in uniform. When a deployment comes up, which job trumps which?

Response by CPT Richard Riley made Sep 20 at 2014 8:14 AM

2014-09-20T08:14:07-04:00

Retiring from military service and moving into public service was a normal transition in the 60's and beyond. It does not fit the 'currently hold a reserve/guard position' but unless you resign your commission you are never truly separated ...
Marine COL John Glenn served in many aspects of public life, serving as US Senator from 1974 to 1999. Marine-Astronaut-Senator-Statesman he is a terrific wealth of knowledge.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 27 at 2014 4:43 AM

2014-09-27T04:43:08-04:00

There is always one in every crowd.............

The appearance of impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which to a layperson without knowledge of the specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions. For instance, although a person might regularly and reliably collect money for her employer in her personal wallet and later give it to her employer, her putting it in her personal wallet may appear improper and give rise to suspicion, etc. It is common business practice to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

I applaud all our successful veterans and service members. There are some positions that can have the appearance of impropriety. We serve the American people and abide by the policies of a civilian elected government. When we start mixing the two we can make every lawful order seem like a political position and vice versa. I think the conspiracy theorist in me feels more at peace if we can seperate the two.

I also admit that I DID NOT major in political science and still watch my favorite cartoons when no one is around. Looney Tunes never get old.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2014 12:55 PM

2014-09-27T12:55:07-04:00

Personally I believe it would be the culmination of a great career as a Citizen-Soldier. And of course Citizen-Soldier being the key difference between Active Duty and Reserve/National Guard is why I believe the DOD has it right. Now as for active service members voicing their political opinion or disagreeing with the policies of the administration while their serving is tricky. That is why being politically appointed/voted to a office and active military service should be off limits.

While on active service your objective should be the defense of the country and the well being of your troops if an NCO or Officer. Leave the politics to the politicians to hammer out. With that being said I don't see it as a problem if serving members voice their disapproval of an administration for their ineffectiveness of running the country. So long as they are not derogatory in nature toward the administration. But you must be discrete in what venues you voice that disapproval. Just as if you disapproved of your command structure in their directives and actions. People will have opinions and they will voice those opinions it is human nature.

Response by CW4 Craig Urban made Apr 15 at 2019 8:01 PM

2019-04-15T20:01:58-04:00

It has always been this way

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 10 at 2019 1:13 PM

2019-11-10T13:13:13-05:00

There are several presidents who were active service then went on to become president.