What are your thoughts on some states considering legislation to prevent excessive deployments of their state Guard units?

1LT Larry Bass — Sun, 05 Jan 2025 15:08:02 -0500

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jan 6 at 2025 1:24 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 01:24:11 -0500

State guard units have a duel roll, state/federal. If a federal roll is required then they must answer to the federal orders. I don't see how the States can get around it. If the need could be picked up in the Reserve side of the house it should, but not so possible. Duties were split, CS/CSS were put in the Reserve, Combat Arms more in the Guard. Once the Federal orders are cut, Guard units then come under the President.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Jan 6 at 2025 11:56 AM

SGM Bill Frazer — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 11:56:56 -0500

Part of their role is to the Federal Govt. Thanks to cutbacks for active unit- almost all PYOPS units are reserves or guards, ditto for almost all water units, trans and logistics. They receive funds for training up to Fed standards. If they don't work, then they lose the funds!

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 6 at 2025 12:56 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 12:56:55 -0500

Is it currently relevant considering we are out of Iraq and Afghanistan?

Response by AN Ron Wright made Jan 6 at 2025 8:34 PM

AN Ron Wright — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 20:34:58 -0500

Support it 100%. Do We still have national guard in a dozen or so countries? I know Oregon was going to Djibouti still

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2025 4:20 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 07 Jan 2025 16:20:11 -0500

I am TOTALLY for this kind of stuff.

I think the Active Components are taking advantage of Reserves to shore up national defense metrics.

How many of us get orders for AT that is 29 days just to screw us out of BAH, or deployments short of the required number of days that screw us out of other things. They use NG and Reserves to shore up numbers and eagerly minimize the cost.

I would like to see the following laws:
1) 30 Days on orders over a rolling 12 month period turns on Housing Allowance Payments retroactively to all days on orders over those previous rolling 12 months.
2) Employers are protected against excessive deployments. Employees with more than 60 months of deployments can be terminated because of said deployments. This is rare, because how many of us are actually at a single employer long enough that 60 months can be racked up for the employer to use that clause, and then if they could, do they actually do that.
2a) The law should be for Reservists and NG, if deployed for 60 months (over the course of their RESERVE career), then the service member can Resign from the Service with 100% benefits, and current contractual bonuses considered fully met obligations (the exception being deployments one volunteered for). You can stay in if you want, but if the deployments are causing you to lose a civilian job based on Federal Law, then said Federal Law should protect Reserve service members enough to keep a civilian job.

My second idea isn't that big of a deal, and probably rarely needed.

My first idea would really screw around with mission planning of exercises ($$$$$) that are over using service members because of staffing shortages.

Response by MSG Thomas Currie made Jan 7 at 2025 7:26 PM

MSG Thomas Currie — Tue, 07 Jan 2025 19:26:24 -0500

Yawn. If the state doesn't want their guard units "excessively" deployed, all they have to do is not deploy their units for state missions. Any state legislation won't impact whether or not the unit can be deployed in federal service.

Response by COL John McClellan made Jan 8 at 2025 8:37 AM

COL John McClellan — Wed, 08 Jan 2025 08:37:40 -0500

The only article I could find that named any states considering this, was in 2022, about Texas. What other states are considering this??

Response by COL John McClellan made Jan 8 at 2025 8:40 AM

COL John McClellan — Wed, 08 Jan 2025 08:40:16 -0500

Interestingly, the stipulation that Texas wants is that Congress must declare war (per the Constitution) to use their state guard. In my opinion, we should be declaring anyway!

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 8 at 2025 6:44 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 08 Jan 2025 18:44:40 -0500

I am going to make the strong assumption there are several thousand US SMs in Poland. Perhaps around 10,000. It is the home of US Army 5th Corps forward with a huge staff numbering around 600. Brigades from the US conduct training and show of force missions. I believe the rotation is one brigade at a time.

Fifth Corps is tasked to execute a contingency plan should the US enter the war because Russia crossed a red line. I really doubt Putin will do that because the US military is superb at conventional warfare.